DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed September 18, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 5 – 7, 9 – 11, 15 – 17 and 19 – 26 are pending in the application with claims 2 – 4, 8, 12 – 14 and 18 being cancelled and claims 21 – 26 being newly added.
Claim Objections
Claims 7, 17, 23 and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7, lines 1-2: “a fixed coupling” should read --the at least one fixed coupling--. This is suggested because, in view of limitations in claim 1 and from the filed specification (for instance, see fig. 3A or 5 and ¶61 and ¶75 of pg.pub of the instant application), one of ordinary skill in the art would understand “300” or “coupling at 114” to be the claimed coupling (i.e. plate-clutch coupling) between the motor shaft 118 and the first end of the drive shaft 112 and “coupling at 116” to be the claimed “at least one fixed coupling” (i.e. flex coupling or a universal-joint-based coupling) between the motor shaft 118 and the gear shaft 128.
Claim 17, line 2: “a fixed coupling” should read --the at least one fixed coupling--. This is suggested for same reason as discussed above for claim 7.
Claim 23 is rejected for being dependent on claim 17.
Claim 26 is objected to for being dependent on claim 7.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 5 – 7, 9 – 11, 15 – 17 and 19 – 26 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.
Claims 1 and 11 recite the limitation “wherein the drive shaft includes at least one intermediate drive-shaft segment”. The phrase “includes at least one intermediate drive-shaft segment” is a new matter. The original filed specification fails to provide support for the claimed subject matter that recites another shaft (referred as “intermediate drive-shaft segment) to be “within” the drive shaft. It is noted that the specification interchangeably uses phrases “intermediate drive shaft” and “drive shaft” for the same component (shown as 112 in the figures). For examination purposes, the claim is examined as best understood by the examiner.
Claims 5 – 7, 9, 10 and 24 – 26 are rejected for being dependent on claim 1.
Claims 15 – 17 and 19 – 23 are rejected for being dependent on claim 11.
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.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], 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 23 and 26 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.
Claim 23 recites the limitation “the fixed coupling is a flex coupling or a universal joint-base coupling”. In view of claim objection discussed above for claim 17 (upon which claim 23 depends), the fixed coupling is “the at least one fixed coupling” which is recited as a flex coupling or a universal joint-base coupling in the independent claim 11 (upon which claim 17 depends). Thus, the limitation recited in claim 23 fails to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends (claims 11 and 17).
Claim 26 recites the limitation “the fixed coupling is a flex coupling or a universal joint-base coupling”. In view of claim objection discussed above for claim 7 (upon which claim 26 depends), the fixed coupling is “the at least one fixed coupling” which is recited as a flex coupling or a universal joint-base coupling in the independent claim 1 (upon which claim 7 depends). Thus, the limitation recited in claim 26 fails to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends (claims 1 and 7).
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.
Examiners Note
With respect to claims 1, 6 and 25 & claims 11, 16 and 22: In view of 35 USC 112(a) rejection for independent claims 1 and 11, the phrase “engagement coupling”, in dependent claims 6, 16, 25 and 22, is interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation for examination purposes. However, it is to be noted that these claims together recite three phrases: “coupling/plate-clutch coupling”, “fixed coupling” and “engagement coupling”. In view of filed specification, “coupling/plate-clutch coupling” is the “engagement coupling” and thus, present at a different location from one claimed in claims 6 and 16. Applicant is suggested to have proper antecedent basis for the couplings if an amendment is made to independent claims 1 and 11 for overcoming the 35 USC 112(a) rejections.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9 – 11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris et al. (US 2016/0369609 – herein after Morris) in view of Morita et al. (US 2017/0088113 – herein after Morita).
In reference to claim 1, Morris teaches a fracturing transport (700), comprising (see fig. 7B in view of embodiment of coupling shown in figs. 14A/14B and ¶77-¶87):
an electric motor (704; see ¶79: “the prime mover 704 may be a dual shaft electric motor that has a motor shaft that protrudes on opposite sides of the electric motor”) having a motor shaft (¶79: “dual shaft”) and being operable to transmit drive (i.e. to transmit power/motion) to the motor shaft;
a pump (702A) disposed adjacent the electric motor;
an external gear box (see fig. A below) connected to the pump (702A) [the shaded portion in fig. A below is considered to be “an external gearbox” in view of presence of the phrase “one or more pumps 702 configured with a dual pinion 724” in ¶84 and the phrase “A pinion,...., or a dual pinion 724, …includes a pinion shaft and one or more pinion gears …” in ¶85; the term “one or more pinion gears” indicates a presence of gear(s) within a shaded region/portion (casing in which gear(s) is/are present) and the term “a pinion shaft” indicates a presence of gear shaft (labelled “gear shaft” in fig. A below) coupled to gear(s) and thus protruding out from the asserted external gear box; each pump 702A, 702B has two gearboxes with corresponding gear(s) and gear shaft providing a flexibility for mounting of the pump as discussed in ¶84];
a drive shaft (viewed as 712 between 702A and 704 in fig. A below; however, this drive shaft is the “keyed shaft underneath shaft cover 1406” in view of disclosure in ¶92 and fig. 14A] having a first end coupled to the motor shaft (in view of fig. A below: right end of asserted drive shaft coupled to shaft of the electric motor 704) at a first hub (location where the coupling between the right end of the asserted drive shaft and the motor shaft occurs; first hub is shown in fig. A below and in view of fig. 14A of Morris, it is a location at which 1410 in disposed) and driven by the transmitted drive (driven by power/motion of the electric motor) [in view of coupling embodiment shown in figs. 14A-14B: drive shaft = keyed shaft underneath shaft cover 1406 that is connected to motor shaft 1408 on left end at the first hub], the first end of the drive shaft (right end of 712) disposed between the electric motor (704) and the external gearbox (as evident from fig. A below);
a gear shaft (see fig. A below; this shaft corresponds to labelled “external gearbox”) that is disposed on the external gear box and that connects to a second end of the drive shaft (in view of fig. A below: left end of the asserted drive shaft) at a second hub (location where the coupling between the left end of the asserted drive shaft and the gear shaft occurs; second hub is shown in fig. A below and in view of fig. 14A of Morris, it is a location at which right end of coupling 1412 couples with the asserted gear shaft) to drive a gear (pinion) of the external gear box, the second end of the drive shaft (left end of 712) disposed between the first hub and the external gear box (as evident from fig. A below); and
a coupling (viewed as 714 between 702A and 704 in fig. A below or fig. 7B; however, this coupling is “1410” in view of fig. 14A and ¶92 and ¶93 and is between asserted pump 702A and electric motor 704) that couples the first end of the drive shaft to the motor shaft at the first hub, wherein the coupling (1410) in a coupled condition (shown in fig. 14A) transfers the transmitted drive (power/motion) from the motor shaft (1408) to the drive shaft (keyed shaft underneath shaft cover 1406), and the coupling (1410) in an uncoupled condition (shown in fig. 14B) isolates the transmitted drive from the motor shaft to the drive shaft (figs. 14A and 14B are relied upon to the features of “coupled condition” and “uncoupled condition”); and
wherein the drive shaft (viewed as 712 between 702A and 704 in fig. A below; however, this drive shaft is the “keyed shaft underneath shaft cover 1406” in view of disclosure in ¶92 and fig. 14A] includes at least one intermediate drive-shaft segment (712 or “keyed shaft”) and at least one fixed coupling (there are two fixed couplings 1412 shown in figs. 14A/14B) [see Morris’s ¶94: “The drive line assembly 1400 may also include one or more proximity sensors 1404A and 1404B to determine the position of the engagement coupling 1410, and one or more fixed couplings 1412 used to directly or indirectly couple the keyed shaft with a pump pinion”] selected from a flex coupling or a universal-joint-based coupling [see Morris’s ¶94: “Examples of fixed couplings 1412 may include, but are not limited to, flex couplings and/or universal joint-based coupling”] between the motor shaft and the gear shaft [the “at least one fixed coupling”, in view of fig. 14A, is between the motor shaft 1408 and the gear shaft (shaft coupled to pinion and on right side of 1412)], the fixed coupling being configured to accommodate misalignment between the motor shaft and the gear shaft and to allow the gear shaft to move within a tolerance threshold relative to the motor shaft without damaging the motor shaft or its bearings [the fixed coupling is capable if having the claimed features; see Morris’s ¶94: “FIGS. 14A and 14B also depict fixed couplings 1412 that couples the keyed shaft to a pump pinion. The drive line assembly 1400 may vary the number of fixed couplings 1412 and intermediate drive shafts based on space availability, misalignment tolerances, and whether vibrations from the pump need to be deflected to avoid affecting the operation of the prime mover. Additionally, in one or more embodiments, the pump's pinion may move or walk slightly axially (e.g., 1/16ths of an inch). Having fixed couplings 1412 and intermediate drive shafts may allow the pump's pinion shaft to move or walk slightly without damaging the motor shaft and/or bearings of the prime mover”].
PNG
media_image1.png
592
1137
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A: Edited fig. 7B of Morris to show claim interpretation.
Morris remains silent on the fracturing transport: “wherein the coupling comprises a plate-clutch coupling disposed between the motor shaft and the first end of the drive shaft, the plate-clutch coupling including a stack of friction plates and an actuator configured to axially move the friction plates between: (i) the coupled condition in which the friction plates engage to transfer the transmitted drive from the motor shaft to the drive shaft, and (ii) the uncoupled condition in which the friction plates disengage to isolate the transmitted drive”.
However, Morita teaches a plate-clutch coupling (27, see fig. 5 and ¶117) disposed between a motor shaft (23a) and a drive shaft (24a), the plate-clutch coupling including a stack of friction plates (27a, 27b) and an actuator (“electromagnetic actuator”) configured to axially move the friction plates between: (i) the coupled condition in which the friction plates engage to transfer the transmitted drive from the motor shaft to the drive shaft, and (ii) the uncoupled condition in which the friction plates disengage to isolate the transmitted drive.
With respect to the asserted “coupling” (714; in Morris), Morris states (see ¶87) “Other embodiments of couplings that may be used to engage and/or disengage the keyed shaft 712 from the prime mover 704 may include torque tubes, air clutches, electro-magnetic clutches, hydraulic clutches, and/or other clutches and disconnects that have manual and/or remote operated disconnect devices”. Morita teaches the claimed plate-clutch coupling (electromagnetic clutch 27). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the coupling in Morris for plate-clutch coupling taught by Morita in order to obtain the predictable result of selectively transferring the power from the motor or motor shaft to the driven component (such as drive shaft or pump shaft). KSR Int’l v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1740-41, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
In reference to claim 6, Morris, as modified, teaches the fracturing transport (see Morris), further comprising an engagement coupling (fixed coupling 1412 is considered to be “engagement” coupling since it engages two shafts) that couples the first end of the gear shaft (see fig. A above) to the second end of the drive shaft (left end of the asserted drive shaft 712) at the second hub, wherein the engagement coupling in a coupled condition transfers the transmitted drive from the drive shaft to the gear shaft, and the engagement coupling in an uncoupled condition isolates the transmitted drive from the drive shaft to the gear shaft (note: the claim limitation does not require an interpretation for coupling/decoupling between the claimed two shafts to occur while the pump is in operation; thus, in an event before turning on the pump assembly, if fixed coupling 1412 is in “coupled” state, then it will transfer the power from the drive shaft to the gear shaft when the pump assembly is turned on and if fixed coupling 1412 is in “uncoupled” state, then it will not transfer the power from the drive shaft to the gear shaft when the pump assembly is turned on).
In reference to claim 7, Morris, as modified, teaches the fracturing transport, further comprising the at least one fixed coupling (1412; see figs. 14A/14B) that couples (in view of fig. A above) the first end of the gear shaft (right end of the gear shaft) to the second end of the drive shaft (left end of the drive shaft 712) at the second hub.
In reference to claim 9, Morris, as modified, teaches the fracturing transport (see Morris), further comprising:
a second pump (702B, in fig. 7B or fig. A above) disposed adjacent the electric motor (704, in fig. 7B or fig. A above);
a second external gear box (gear box corresponding to the second pump; labelled “second external gear box” in fig. A above) connected to the second pump (702B);
a second drive shaft (viewed as 712 between 702B and 704 in fig. A above; however, this drive shaft is the “keyed shaft within 1406” in fig. 14A) having a first end (in view of fig. A above: left end) coupled to the motor shaft at a third hub (see fig. A above) and driven by the transmitted drive (driven by power/motion of the electric motor);
a second gear shaft (shaft coupled to pinion of the second pump 702B; labelled in fig. A above as well) that is disposed on the second external gear box and that connects to a second end (in view of fig. A above: right end) of the second drive shaft at a fourth hub (see fig. A above) to drive a gear (pinion) of the second external gear box; and
a second coupling (viewed as 714 between 702B and 704 in fig. A above; however, this second coupling is “1410” in view of fig. 14A) that couples the first end of the second drive shaft to the motor shaft (“1408” in fig. 14A) at the third hub.
In reference to claim 10, Morris, as modified, teaches the fracturing transport (see Morris), wherein the pump (702A) comprises:
a power end assembly (not seen in fig. 7B but is present as evident from disclosure in ¶82-¶84; it is further shown as “718” in fig. 7A) coupled to the gear (pinion) of the external gear box to receive the transmitted drive; and
a fluid end assembly (not seen in fig. 7B but is present as evident from disclosure in ¶84; it is further shown as “716” in fig. 7A) driven by the power end assembly and configured to pressurize fracturing fluid.
In reference to claim 25, Morris, as modified, teaches the fracturing transport, wherein the engagement coupling (1412, in Morris) is a spline coupling, a clutch, an air clutch, an electro-magnetic clutch, a hydraulic clutch, or a plate clutch [Morris states (see ¶94): “Examples of fixed couplings 1412 may include, but are not limited to, flex couplings and/or universal joint-based coupling.”; “spline coupling” is considered to be a flex coupling since spline coupling are designed to handle shaft misalignment, reduce vibration, and manage torque in applications like pumps].
In reference to claim 26, Morris, as modified, teaches the fracturing transport, wherein the at least one fixed coupling (1412, in Morris) is a flex coupling or a universal joint-based coupling (as discussed above in claim 1).
In reference to claims 11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22 and 23, these claims are method claims. The modified fracturing transport of Morris as above does not explicitly teach the method of pumping fracturing fluid; however, the modified fracturing transport of Morris does teach all the structural limitations as set forth in claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 25 and 26. Therefore, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the process or method claimed, then the process or method claimed will be considered to be obvious over by the modified prior art device. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). MPEP 2112.02(I) [note: with respect to claim 19 which is similar to claim 9 except for following limitations: “on a side of the electric motor opposite the pump” in line 2 and “the second drive shaft being disposed on a side of the electric motor that is opposite to a side where the drive shaft is disposed” in lines 9-11, these limitations are further taught by Morris in view of fig. A above: for instance, pump 702A and drive shaft 712 (between 702A and 704) are present on left side of the electric motor 704 while second pump 702B and second drive shaft 712 (between 704 and 702B) are present on right side of the electric motor 704, thus being on the opposite side of pump 702A and asserted drive shaft 712].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 15, 21 and 24 would be allowable, for same reasons as discussed in the last Office Action, if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Note: Newly added claims 21 and 24 depends on previously indicated allowable claims 15 and 5 respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, dated 09/18/2025, with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been considered but they are moot. The amendment to independent claims 1 and 11 changed the scope of the claim. As a result, the prior arts have been re-evaluated and re-applied to independent claims, in view of newly found reference of Morita.
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 CHIRAG JARIWALA whose telephone number is (571)272-0467. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM-5 PM.
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, ESSAMA OMGBA can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/CHIRAG JARIWALA/
Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/BRYAN M LETTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746