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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 7-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/23/26.
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.
Claim 15 is 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. Specifically it is unclear what is meant by the volume of space envelope occupied by the bevel gear set is less than 501. 501 is not understood to be an accepted volume. The specification does not provide any further clarification of its meaning.
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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wowerat (US 2021/0001710).
In re claim 1, Wowerat teaches a machine body (fig. 32), wherein the machine body defines a longitudinal axis; a ground-engaging propulsion structure to permit movement of the machine over the ground (fig. 21); a load-handling apparatus (fig. 32) coupled to the machine body and moveable by a movement actuator with respect to the machine body (clear from par. 81); a first electric motor (20) for providing power to the propulsion structure; and a drivetrain (62a) for transmitting power from the first electric motor to the propulsion structure, the drivetrain comprising a drive shaft; wherein the first electric motor defines a longitudinal axis, and wherein the first electric motor longitudinal axis extends substantially horizontally; and wherein the first electric motor longitudinal axis is at substantially 90° to the drive shaft longitudinal axis (fig. 21), wherein the drivetrain comprises a gear train, and wherein the gear train comprises a bevel gear set (par. 69-73).
In re claim 2, Wowerat teaches an operator cab, wherein the operator cab is positioned towards a first side of the machine body with respect to the machine body longitudinal axis, and wherein the first electric motor is located on a second side of the machine body, opposing the first side with respect to the machine body longitudinal axis (fig. 32 – cab is on one side and one of the powered wheels on the other).
In re claim 16, Wowerat teaches the ground-engaging propulsion structure is exclusively powered by one or more electric motors (par. 44-45).
In re claim 20, Wowerat teaches a single electric motor for providing power to the propulsion structure (fig. 20).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 13 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wowerat as discussed above.
In re claim 13, Wowerat differs in that it doesn’t teach at least one high voltage electric energy storage unit, wherein at least one high voltage electric energy storage unit is substantially wholly located on a second side of the machine body, opposing the first side with respect to the machine body longitudinal axis, and or further comprising at least one hydrogen fuel cell, wherein at least one hydrogen fuel cell is substantially wholly located on a second side of the machine body, opposing the first side with respect to the machine body longitudinal axis. The examiner takes official notice that high voltage electric energy devices are well known and conventional in the electric vehicle arts and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of invention. Moreover, the examiner finds that it would similarly be obvious to place it on one side or the other as an obvious matter of design choice. The examiner notes applicant has not indicated any criticality in the specification for such placement.
In re claim 17, the examiner further takes official notice that the use of a single high voltage electric energy storage unit for charging an electric motor is well known and conventional in the art and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 14 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EREZ GURARI whose telephone number is (571)270-1156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00AM-6:30PM.
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, Marc Jimenez can be reached at (571) 272-4530. 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.
/EREZ GURARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights