DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 03/11/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 5-18 and 21 remain pending in the application.
The Examiner notes that Applicant’s after final amendment of 02/04/2026 was entered, and included new claims 21 and 22. However, the newly entered amendment of 03/11/2026 did not include previously entered claims 21 and 22, and introduced a new claim 21. In the interest of compact prosecution, the Examiner is considering claim 21 of 02/04/2026 to be amended to the claim 21 of 03/11/2026, and claim 22 is considered to be cancelled.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-2 allowable. Claims 5 and 11-18, previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement, require all the limitations of an allowable claim. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(a), the restriction requirement among species A-B, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 03/26/2025, is hereby withdrawn and claims 5 and 11-18 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 11 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “a first part”, “a disc”, “an inner face”, “an outer face”, “a periphery of the outer face”, “a second part” and “a bushing”. It is unclear if these limitations are referring to the same limitations in claim 1, or if the claims requires additional limitations.
Claim 21 lines 1-3 recite the limitation “the endless screw mechanism and the second pinion cooperate to transmit rotational motion from the toothed wheel to the driven shaft”. However, claim 1 lines 18-19 recite the limitation “the endless screw mechanism meshes directly with the second pinion such that rotation of the toothed wheel drives rotation of the driven shaft”. Claim 21 appears to broaden the scope of claim 1, and therefore it is unclear what is required by the claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 5 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 5 and 15-18 depend on a cancelled claim. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 6-10 and 12-14 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record, Jung (US 20190249752 A1) in view of Malitourne (WO 2015144151 A1), does not anticipate that “the toothed wheel comprises a first part in the form of a disc with an inner face and an outer face, said toothing are formed on a periphery of the outer face, the toothed wheel comprises a second part in the form of a bushing extending from the outer face of the first part and on which the torque output element is located, said first part and second part are in one piece, wherein the endless screw mechanism is located on the bushing of the toothed wheel, and wherein the endless screw mechanism meshes directly with the second pinion such that rotation of the toothed wheel drives rotation of the driven shaft” as recited in claim 1. The prior art of record does not provide any teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify toward the entirety of applicant's claimed invention. Further, there was no cogent reasoning elsewhere available to one of ordinary skill that was unequivocally independent of improper hindsight of applicant's invention and that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify the prior art to obtain the applicant' s invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections that were necessitated by an amendment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 5:00pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-357-2384. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights