DETAILED ACTION
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 3 and 17 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse of the drive system of Figures 2 and 3 (Species I) in the reply filed on July 8, 2025.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11, 12, and 16 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “a second coupling” in line 8. It is unclear from the claim how a second coupling can exist without first having the presence of a first coupling. Claims 12 and 16 are rejected for depending upon claim 11. Claims 13 and 18-20 have not been rejected as a first coupling is introduced in claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 10-13, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 10,781,863 (Gilliland).
Regarding claim 1, Gilliland discloses a drive system (see Figures 5A and 5B, and annotated Figure 1 below), comprising:
a gearbox (118), comprising a passage therethrough (see annotated Figure 1 below);
a coupling shaft (120 & 148) disposed at least partially within the passage (see Figure 5A);
a first coupling (at 138, 142) carried by a first end of the coupling shaft, the first coupling being configured to accommodate misalignment (see column 4, line 32, through column 5, line 56); and
a second coupling (see annotated Figure 1 below, where the second coupling is provided as a bearing) carried by a second end of the coupling shaft, the second coupling being configured to accommodate misalignment (an inherent feature of bearings in that they accommodate deflection via swiveling between the rolling elements and inner and outer races of the bearing),
wherein the first coupling is disposed axially beyond a first axial end of the gearbox and wherein the second coupling is disposed axially beyond a second axial end of the gearbox (see annotated Figure 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
707
1135
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1. Annotated Figure 5A of Gilliland
Regarding claim 2, Gilliland discloses the first coupling (142) is integrally formed with the coupling shaft (120 and column 8, lines 20-22).
Regarding claim 4, Gilliland discloses a tubular cap (see annotated Figure 1 above) at least partially disposed within the passage and axially overlapping at least a portion of the coupling shaft (120 & 148).
Regarding claim 6, Gilliland discloses a nut (160) at least partially received within each of the first coupling (at 138, 142) and the coupling shaft (120 & 148; see Figure 5A.
Regarding claim 7, Gilliland discloses the first coupling (at 138, 142) is axially captured relative to the coupling shaft (120 & 148) by the nut (160; see Figure 5A).
Regarding claim 10, Gilliland discloses the first coupling (at 138, 142) comprises a shoulder (shown best adjacent 162 in Figure 5B) for interfacing with the nut (160).
Regarding claim 11, Gilliland discloses a drive system (see Figures 5A and 5B, and annotated Figure 1 above), comprising:
a main rotor gearbox (124);
an intermediate gearbox (118); and
a coupling shaft (120 & 148) for connecting the MRGB to the intermediate gearbox, the coupling shaft being at least partially disposed within an interior passage of the intermediate gearbox (see Figure 5A);
wherein the intermediate gearbox is disposed axially between the MRGB and a drive system component (see annotated Figure 1 above; the drive system component may also be formed by an actuator coupled to bottom end 154 as set forth in column 4, lines 63-64); and
wherein a second coupling (see annotated Figure 1 above, where the second coupling is provided as a bearing; the second coupling may also be formed by the bottom end 154) is carried by the coupling shaft and is disposed axially between the intermediate gearbox and the drive system component (see Figures 5A, 5B, and annotated Figure 1 above).
Regarding claim 12, Gilliland discloses the second coupling (see annotated Figure 1 above, where the second coupling is provided as a bearing) configured for accommodating misalignment (an inherent feature of bearings in that they accommodate deflection via swiveling between the rolling elements and inner and outer races of the bearing)
Regarding claim 13, Gilliland discloses a first coupling (at 138, 142) configured for accommodating misalignment (see column 4, line 32, through column 5, line 56), the first coupling being disposed axially between the MRGB (124) and the intermediate gearbox (118; see Figure 5A).
Regarding claim 16, Gilliland discloses the second coupling (154) is formed integrally with the coupling shaft (see Figure 5A).
Regarding claim 18, Gilliland discloses a nut (160) at least partially received within each of the first coupling (at 138, 142) and the coupling shaft (120 & 148; see Figure 5A.
Regarding claim 19, Gilliland discloses the first coupling (at 138, 142) and the coupling shaft (120 & 148) are connected using a curvic or splined interface (164, 166).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilliland in view of US 5,529,459 (Pancotti).
Gilliland discloses the drive system of claim 4, but does not expressly disclose an annular seal disposed on the tubular cap.
Pancotti teaches disclose an annular seal (40) disposed on a tubular cap of a drive system (1) in order to seal the system (see Figure and column 2, lines 35-37). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drive system of Gilliland such that an annular seal disposed on the tubular cap, as taught in Pancotti, in order to seal the drive system.
Claims 8, 9, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilliland in view of US 4,457,734 (Cohen).
Regarding claim 8, Gilliland discloses the drive system of claim 6, but does not expressly disclose the nut comprises external threads complementary to internal threads of the coupling shaft.
Cohen teaches a nut (56) comprising external threads (54) complementary to internal threads (at 34) of a coupling shaft (20). Cohen teaches this structure provides a backup means of connection for the coupling shaft which maintains a high degree of reliable performance capable of carrying extremely high loads (see column 1, lines 20-61). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drive system of Gilliland such that the nut comprises external threads complementary to internal threads of the coupling shaft, as taught in Cohen, in order to provide provides a backup means of connection for the coupling shaft which maintains a high degree of reliable performance capable of carrying extremely high loads.
Regarding claims 9 and 20, Gilliland discloses the drive system of claims 6 and 13, respectively, but does not expressly disclose the nut (160) comprises an internal profile configured to receive a tool comprising a complementary profile for rotating the nut relative to the coupling shaft (120 & 148).
Cohen teaches a nut (56) comprising an internal profile configured to receive a tool having a complementary profile for rotating the nut relative to a coupling shaft (20) in order to provide an easy and convenient means of securing the nut (see column 3, line 64, through column 4, line 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drive system of Gilliland such that the nut comprises an internal profile configured to receive a tool comprising a complementary profile for rotating the nut relative to the coupling shaft, as taught in Cohen, in order to provide an easy and convenient means of securing the nut.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7, filed December 1, 2025, with respect to the rejections over the previous interpretation of Gilliland have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection over the previous interpretation has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a new interpretation of Gilliland.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Josh Skroupa whose telephone number is (571)270-3220. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM – 3:30 PM ET.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached on (571)270-5281. 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.
/Josh Skroupa/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
January 15, 2026