DETAILED 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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to the amendments/remarks filed on 04/16/2026. Claims 1-18 are pending; claims 1-3, 6-7, 9, 11-12, 15-16, 18 have been amended.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/16/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore “an additional first motor” in claim 8 and 17 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The term “transfer case” from ¶[0018]-[0019] describes a transfer case on in the context of preferred configurations and does not set a boundaries on the term “transfer case”. Thereof, under BRI, examiner interprets “transfer case” as any subassembly that capable of routing torque from a motor/power source to one or more axle shafts.
Applicant does not have any special definition of the term “coupled”; “connected”. Accordingly, the term “couple”; “connected” in the various claims is interpreted in its ordinary meaning, i.e., an indirect connection (e.g. with intermediate elements).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the first power take-off is configured to be directly coupled with the first electric motor”. Base on the original specification and drawings (Fig. 1) show that the PTO driven through transfer case gearing and also ¶[0043] of USPGPUB describes “The first transfer case 11 likewise allows the first power take-off 24 to be coupled with or uncoupled from the first electric motor 12 by way of a first power take-off coupling element”. The specification contains no disclosure of recited limitation; thereof, the amendment constitutes new matter because there is no explicit or implicit support for the added limitation.
The dependent claims are also rejected due to their dependency from claim 1.
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 1-18 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 1 recites “wherein the first power take-off is configured to be directly coupled with the first electric motor”. The specification describes “The first transfer case 11 likewise allows the first power take-off 24 to be coupled with or uncoupled from the first electric motor 12 by way of a first power take-off coupling element”, ¶[0043] of USPGPUB. This confirms that the connection between first PTO and first motor is not a direct connection. Thereof, it is unclear how the first power take off could directly couple with first electric motor as claimed.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the first axle output is configured to be directly coupled and uncoupled with the first electric motor”. The specification describes “the first transfer case 11 allows the first axle output 18 to be coupled with or uncoupled from the first electric motor 12 by way of a first axle output coupling element (not shown in FIG. 1). This confirms that the connection between first axle output and first motor is not a direct connection. Thereof, it is unclear how the first axle output could directly couple with first electric motor as claimed.
Claims 6 and 15 recites “a plurality first axles associated with the first transfer case”. There is no definition of the term “associated with” in the specification or the claim, it is unclear whether the axles are mechanically connected, electronically controlled or merely located near the transfer case.
Claims 7 and 16 recites “a plurality second axles associated with the second transfer case”. There is no definition of the term “associated with” in the specification or the claim, it is unclear whether the axles are mechanically connected, electronically controlled or merely located near the transfer case.
Claim 9 recites “the second power take-off”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The dependent claims are also rejected due to their dependency from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by VAN DINGENEN (US 20210362593 A1)
VAN DINGENEN discloses:
Claim 1: An electrically operable drive train (200; Fig.2), comprising:
a first transfer case (226, 248, 298, 298, 293, 286, 290, 297, shaft connects to PTO 278) having a first input (258), a first axle output (297) and a first coupling output (230) and a first power take-off (shaft connects to PTO 278);
a first electric motor (216);
a first axle (299);
a second transfer case (232, 252, 250, 282, 284, 286, 291, 292, 228, 208, 210, 214) having a second input (264), a second axle output (292) and a second coupling output (224);
a second electric motor (218) and;
a second axle (296);
wherein the first coupling output (298) is configured to be coupled with the second coupling output (282) by way of a coupling shaft (shaft of carrier 286);
wherein the first power take-off (shaft connects to PTO 278) is configured to be directly coupled (note: examiner interprets “directly coupled” in light of ¶[0043] from applicant’s specification as “operably connect via a clutch 276”) with the first electric motor (216); and
wherein the first axle output (297) is configured to be directly coupled (note: examiner interprets “directly coupled” ” in light of ¶[0043] as “operably connect to via transfer case: 226, 248, clutch 293, 286, 291”) and uncoupled with the first electric motor (12).
Claim 2: The drive train (200; Fig.2) as claimed in claim 1,
the first coupling output (298) is configured to be coupled and uncoupled with the first electric motor (216) by way of a first coupling output coupling element (293),
the second axle output (292) is configured to be coupled (via 232, 252, clutch 284, 286, 290) with the second electric motor (218), and
the second coupling output (282) is configured to be coupled and uncoupled (via 284) with the second electric motor (218) by way of a second coupling output coupling element (284).
Claim 3: The drive train (200; Fig.2) as claimed in claim 2, wherein the second transfer case (232, 252, 250, 282, 284, 286, 291, 292, 228, 208, 210, 214) further has a second power take-off (214) configured to be coupled (via 228) with the second electric motor (218).
Claim 4: The drive train (200; Fig.2) as claimed in claim 3, wherein the first coupling output coupling element (293) is arranged in the first transfer case (226, 248, 298, 298, 293, 286, 290, 297, shaft connects to PTO 278) and the second coupling output coupling element (284) is arranged in the second transfer case (232, 252, 250, 282, 284, 286, 291, 292, 228, 208, 210, 214).
Claim 6: The drive train (200; Fig.2) as claimed in claim 1, comprising a plurality of first axles (299, see ¶[0043]) associated with the first transfer case (226, 248, 298, 298, 293, 286, 290, 297, shaft connects to PTO 278).
Claim 7: The drive train (200; Fig.2) as claimed in claim 1, comprising a plurality of second axles (296) associated the second transfer case (232, 252, 250, 282, 284, 286, 291, 292, 228, 208, 210, 214).
Claim 10: A vehicle (202) comprising the drive train (200) of claim 1.
Claim 11: The vehicle (202) of claim 10, the first coupling output (298) is configured to be coupled and uncoupled with the first electric motor (216) by way of a first coupling output coupling element (293);
the second axle output (292) is configured to be coupled (via 232, 252, clutch 284, 286, 290) with the second electric motor (218); and
the second coupling output (282) is configured to be coupled (via 284) with the second electric motor (218) by way of a second coupling output coupling element (284).
Claim 12: The vehicle of claim 11, wherein the second transfer case (232, 252, 250, 282, 284, 286, 291, 292, 228, 208, 210, 214) further has a second power take-off (214) configured to be coupled with the second electric motor (218).
Claim 13: The vehicle of claim 12, wherein the first coupling output coupling element (293) is arranged in the first transfer case (226, 248, 298, 298, 293, 286, 290, 297, shaft connects to PTO 278) and the second coupling output coupling element (284) is arranged in the second transfer case (232, 252, 250, 282, 284, 286, 291, 292, 228, 208, 210, 214).
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, 10, 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SEEMANN ( DE102018215924A1)
Claim 1: An electrically operable drive train (Fig.5), comprising:
a first transfer case (15, 16, 17,18, 20, 8) having a first input (15), a first axle output (17) and a first coupling output (16) and a first power take-off (8);
a first electric motor (1);
a first axle (11);
a second transfer case (21, 22, 23, 24) having a second input (22), a second axle output (24) and a second coupling output (23);
a second electric motor (13) and;
a second axle (12);
wherein the first coupling output (16) is configured to be coupled (via 22 and input gearset and coupling shaft-see annotated Fig. below) with the second coupling output (23) by way of a coupling shaft (see annotated Fig below);
wherein the first power take-off (8) is configured to be directly coupled (note: examiner interprets “directly coupled” in light of ¶[0043] from applicant’s specification as operably coupled via transfer case-15, 16, 17,18, 20, 8) with the first electric motor (1);
wherein the first axle output (17) is configured to be directly coupled and uncoupled (e.g. operably connect to via 18) with the first electric motor (1)
PNG
media_image1.png
686
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 5: The drive train (Fig.5) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first axle output (17) and the first coupling output (16) have an identical speed reduction relative to the first input (15) (as both 17 and 16 are mounted on same shaft 15. Thereof, the speed ratio of both 16 and 17 relative to shaft 15 is identical), and
the second axle output (24) and the second coupling output (23) have the same identical speed reduction relative to the second input (22) (as both 23, 24 are mounted on same shaft 22. Thereof, the speed ratio of both 23 and 24 relative to shaft 22 is identical)
Claim 6: The drive train (Fig.5) as claimed in claim 1, comprising a plurality of associated first axles (11) associated with the first transfer case (15, 16, 17,18, 20, 8).
Claim 7: The drive train (Fig.5) as claimed in claim 1, comprising a plurality of associated second axles (12) associated with the second transfer case (21, 22, 23, 24).
Claim 10: A vehicle (see ¶[0001] of translation) comprising the drive train (Fig.5) of claim 1.
Claim 14. The vehicle of claim 10, wherein the first axle output (17) and the first coupling output (16) have an identical speed reduction relative to the first input (15) (as both 17 and 16 are mounted on same shaft 15. Thereof, the speed ratio of both 16 and 17 relative to shaft 15 is identical), and
the second axle output (24) and the second coupling output (23) have the same identical speed reduction relative to the second input (22) (as both 23, 24 are mounted on same shaft 22. Thereof, the speed ratio of both 23 and 24 relative to shaft 22 is identical)
Claim 15: The vehicle of claim 14, comprising a plurality of first axles (11) associated with the first transfer case (15, 16, 17,18, 20, 8).
Claim 16: The vehicle of claim 15, comprising a plurality of second axles (12) associated with the second transfer case (21, 22, 23, 24).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 8-9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VAN DINGENEN (US 20210362593 A1) in view of Tabata (US 20040242368 A1)
Claim 8: VAN DINGENEN discloses the drive train (200; Fig.2) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first power take-off (shaft connects to PTO 278) is connected (via 226 and 276) in a driving manner to an additional power source (204).
VAN DINGENEN does not disclose wherein the additional power source is another electric motor.
Tabata teaches engine (8) may be replaced with an electric motor or other power drive source (see ¶0225]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the power source (204- VAN DINGENEN) with electric motor in order to reduce carbon footprint, noise and cost.
Claims 9 and 18: VAN DINGENEN discloses wherein the second power take-off (214) is connected in a driving manner to an additional power source (204). VAN DINGENEN does not disclose wherein the additional power source is another electric motor.
Tabata teaches engine (8) may be replaced with an electric motor or other power drive source (see ¶0225]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the power source (204- VAN DINGENEN) with electric motor as taught by Tabata in order to reduce carbon footprint, noise and cost.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEEMANN ( DE102018215924A1) in view of BAIER (DE202021105282u1)
Claim 17: SEEMANN does not disclose wherein the first power take-off is connected in a driving manner to an additional first electric motor.
Baier teaches a drive train (Fig.3) having a first motor (6); second motor (7); a first power take off (11) is connected in a driving manner to an additional first electric motor (10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add additional first electric motor (10) that is connected in driving manner to first PTO as taught by Baier in the drive system of SEEMANN for the purpose of increasing available torque for PTO, backup functionality in case first motor fails.
Response to Arguments/Amendment
Applicant’s remarks with respect to the drawing objections for failing to show features of the terms “first axle output coupling element”; “first power take-off coupling element”, “second axle output coupling element”; “first coupling output coupling element” and “second coupling output coupling element” have been withdrawn in light of the amendment to the claims.
Applicant’s argument “FIGS. 1-3 depict "first electric motor 12." It is understood that a configuration may include multiples of the same element/feature, however it is unreasonable to require a potential infinite number of figures in order to depict all possible configurations. By depicting the "first electric motor 12" in FIGS. 1- 3, the feature of an "additional first electric motor" is also sufficiently understood and shown in the figures.” with respect the drawing objections for failing to show features of the terms “additional first motor” have been considered but are not persuasive because under 37 CFR 1.83(a) the drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims and from neither Figs.1-3 nor the specification describe/depict an additional first motor associated with the first transfer case. There is no additional first motor shown on the first transfer case, nor any structure that indicate an additional motor could be connected to the first power take off. Secondly, applicant argued that it is unreasonable to require a potential infinite number of figures in order to depict all possible configurations. However, examiner only asked for one configuration that is actually claimed and if the “additional first electric motor” as a distinct element.
Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claims 2-4, 9, 11-13, 17 under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn in light of the amendment to the claims.
Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claims 6-7, 15-16 under 35 USC§ 112(b) have been considered but did not overcome the rejections (see rejections under 35 USC§ 112 above).
Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claim 8 and 17 have been considered and persuasive in light to the remarks on page 8.
Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejections of claim 9 under 35 USC§ 112 (b) has been considered but did not overcome the rejections (see rejections under 35 USC 112 above).
Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claim 18 under 35 USC §112 (b) has been withdrawn in light of the amendment to claim 18.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 USC §102 have been considered but are not persuasive because applicant’s specification does not disclose the amended limitation in claim 1. Instead the specification describes “the first transfer case 11 allows the first axle output 18 to be coupled with or uncoupled from the first electric motor 12 by way of a first axle output coupling element (not shown in FIG. 1). The first transfer case 11 likewise allows the first power take-off 24 to be coupled with or uncoupled from the first electric motor 12 by way of a first power take-off coupling element (not shown in FIG. 1)” This confirms that the connection is not a direct connection. Thereof, the rejections under 35 USC§ 102 are maintained.
Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejections of claim 9 and 18 under 35 USC§ 103 have been considered but moot in view of the amendment to the claims.
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 Lillian T Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-5404. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571)270-5565. 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.
/LILLIAN T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3655A
/ERNESTO A SUAREZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights