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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/19/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 08/19/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 06/24/2025.
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 1-10 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hendershot (US 4951518 A) in view of CTS and Kubo (JP H06206135 A).
Regarding claim 1, Hendershot discloses a power transmission assembly (see Fig. 2; 10) comprising: a first shaft (12) along an axis, the first shaft having a first end (right end of 12 in the figure) and a second end (left end of 12 in the figure); a second shaft (13) along the same axis as the first shaft, the second shaft having a first end (left end of 13 in the figure) and a second end (right end of 13 in the figure), the first end of the second shaft being configured to engage with the second end of the first shaft via a harmonic drive (11); a first input (32) coupled to a portion of the first shaft; a harmonic drive shaft (72, 55, 56) engaged coaxially within the first shaft, the harmonic drive engaged with the harmonic drive shaft adjacent the second end of the first shaft, the harmonic drive further engaged with the first end of the second shaft; and a second input (42) coupled to a portion of the second shaft, wherein the harmonic drive comprises a flexspline (21, 22) configured to rotate together with the first shaft in the same direction as the first shaft when the harmonic drive shaft is rotating (via 35). Hendershot fails to disclose first and second input gears. However, CTS teaches the use of gears/sprockets depending on the system requirements (see page 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify the sprockets of Hendershot with gears, as taught by CTS, to allow for systems with non-parallel axes, to be able to handle higher torque and loads, to be able to handle high-speed applications, to provide higher precision, to provide increased efficiency and to provide higher durability (see page 3). Hendershot fails to disclose the harmonic drive shaft extending through the second end of the first shaft and beyond the first end of the first shaft. However, Kubo teaches the harmonic drive shaft (see Fig. 1; 4) extending through the second end of the first shaft (left end of 2b) and beyond the first end of the first shaft (right end of 2b). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Hendershot with a harmonic drive shaft that extends through the second end of the first shaft and beyond the first end of the first shaft, as taught by Kubo, to allow for different orientations of inputs and outputs which provides a more compact assembly and allows for use in a wider variety of transmissions. Additionally, the Examiner notes that Applicant has not demonstrated any criticality to the limitation requiring the harmonic drive shaft to pass entirely through the first shaft. According to MPEP 2144.04, it would be appropriate to rely solely on case law as rationale to support an obvious rejection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Hendershot in the arrangement taught by Kubo as an obvious rearrangement of parts. In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 2, Hendershot discloses the harmonic drive (11) comprises: an elliptical wave generator (24) coupled to the harmonic drive shaft (72, 55, 56), wherein the flexspline (21, 22) is engaged with the elliptical wave generator; and a circular spline (20) surrounding at least a portion of the flexspline, the circular spline engaged with the flexspline, the circular spline configured to engage with the first end of the second shaft (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Hendershot discloses a flexspline adapter (35) coupled to the flexspline (21, 22), the flexspline adapter configured to engage with the second end of the first shaft, such that the flexspline and the first shaft are configured to rotate together (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Hendershot discloses the circular spline (20) and the second shaft (13) are configured to rotate together (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Hendershot discloses a circular spline adapter (51) coupled to the circular spline (20), the circular spline adapter configured to engage with the second shaft (13).
Regarding claim 6, Hendershot discloses a shaft support (48) coupled to the circular spline (20), the shaft support configured to align the first shaft (12) and second shaft (13) along the same axis.
Regarding claim 7, Hendershot discloses a motor assembly (14) coupled to the harmonic drive shaft (72, 55, 56), the motor assembly configured to control a rotation of the harmonic drive shaft.
Regarding claim 8, Hendershot discloses the harmonic drive shaft (72, 55, 56) is configured to control a phase adjustment of the power transmission assembly (11; see column 8 lines 26-29, wherein when pulse current is provided to a stepper motor, for example, the rotor will rotationally advance or retard relative to the stator to drive the wave generator 24).
Regarding claim 9, Hendershot discloses the harmonic drive shaft (72, 55, 56) is configured to provide dynamic phase adjustment of the power transmission assembly while the power transmission assembly is in motion (see column 8 lines 26-29, wherein when pulse current is provided to a stepper motor, for example, the rotor will rotationally advance or retard relative to the stator to drive the wave generator 24).
Regarding claim 10, Hendershot fails to disclose the harmonic drive is configured to provide a 160:1 gear ratio. However, it is well known in the art that the gear ratio of a harmonic drive is determined by the following equation: Gear Ratio = Number of flexspline teeth) / (Number of circular spline teeth - Number of flexspline teeth). As such, the gear ratio of the harmonic drive is considered a result effective variable, i.e., a variable that can be adjusted or optimized to achieve a specific result. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to provide the particular claimed ratios of flexspline teeth and circular spline teeth thereof, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 16, Hendershot discloses the flexspline (21, 22) comprises gear teeth disposed on its outer circumference (see column 4 lines 32-36, wherein the second element or part of the strain wave gearing assembly comprises a flexible and thinner inner ring or spline gear 21 integral with a flexible cup 22. The flexible gear 21 carries a number of fine external spur gear teeth).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the harmonic drive (Hendershot, 11) is configured to cause rotation of the second input gear (Hendershot, gear provided on 13) in a direction opposite a rotation of the first input gear (Hendershot, gear provided on 12) when the harmonic drive shaft is rotating (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Hendershot discloses the motor assembly (14) is positioned closer to the first end of the first shaft (left end of 12 in the figure) than the second end of the first shaft (right end of 12 in the figure), wherein the motor assembly configured to control rotation of the harmonic drive shaft (see column 7 lines 38-39, wherein the motor assembly 14 comprises an electrical motor 70 for controlling operation of the wave generator 24).
Regarding claim 19, Hendershot fails to disclose the motor assembly is not co-axial with the harmonic drive shaft. However, Kubo teaches the motor assembly (see Fig. 1; 20) is not co-axial with the harmonic drive shaft (4).It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Hendershot with a motor assembly that is not coaxial with the harmonic drive shaft, as taught by Kubo, to reduce the axial size of the transmission assembly allowing for use with different size requirements. Additionally, it has been held that a rearrangement of parts, which does not modify the operation of the device, is an obvious matter of design choice. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this instance, a coaxial and a non-coaxial motor are both capable of rotating the harmonic drive shaft, such that providing one or the other is an obvious matter of design choice.
Regarding claim 20, Hendershot fails to disclose the motor assembly is coupled to the harmonic drive shaft via a belt drive. However, Kubo teaches the motor assembly (see Fig. 1; 20) is coupled to the harmonic drive shaft (4) via a belt drive (27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Hendershot with a belt drive, as taught by Kubo, to reduce the axial size of the transmission assembly allowing for use with different size requirements. Additionally, it has been held that a rearrangement of parts, which does not modify the operation of the device, is an obvious matter of design choice. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this instance, a coaxial direct connect motor and a non-coaxial belt connected motor are both capable of rotating the harmonic drive shaft, such that providing one or the other is an obvious matter of design choice.
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