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 .
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) 1-3 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PG Publication No. 2025/0145249 to Mallette et al in view of PG Publication No. 2008/0149435 to Burgoon et al and further in view of U.S. Patent No 6,705,946 to Bridges.
Regarding Claim 1, Mallette et al disclose a braking system (see Figures 71-74) for a snowmobile 20 having most all the features of the instant invention including: the braking system having a brake rotor 111 with an inner spline (see paragraph 0255), a track driveshaft 103 having an outer spline 105/106, the track driveshaft 103 formed from a first material (inherently so), and a splined spacer 133 (see Figure 71) having an inner spline 140 and an outer spline 137, the inner spline 140 of the splined spacer 133 forming a splined connection with the outer spline 105/106 of the track driveshaft 103 such that the splined spacer 133 is coaxially positioned about the track driveshaft 103.
However, Mallette et al do not disclose that the outer spline of the splined spacer is configured to from a splined connection with the inner spline of the brake rotor nor that the splined spacer is formed from a second material, wherein the first material of the track driveshaft is different from the second material of the spacer.
Regarding the configuration of the outer spline of the splined spacer and splined connection with the brake rotor, Burgoon et al teach a braking system (see Figures 1, 10, and 14) having a brake rotor 14 with an inner spline 20 and a splined spacer 12 having an inner spline 26 and an outer spline 32, the inner spline 26 of the splined spacer 12 forming a splined connection with a spline of a driveshaft (see paragraph 0063) such that the splined spacer 12 is coaxially positioned about the driveshaft, the outer spline 32 of the splined spacer 12 is configured to form a splined connection with the inner spline 20 of the brake rotor 14 (see Figures 10 and 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the spacer of Mallette et al so that the outer spline of the splined spacer is configured to form a splined connection with the inner spline of the brake rotor as taught by Burgoon et al as an alternate means of connecting the driveshaft with the rotor. Installing a spacer between the driveshaft and the rotor allows for axial movement across the bearing assembly to allow movement of the brake rotor to accommodate bending and flexing of the driveshaft.
Regarding the splined spacer being formed from a second material, wherein the first material of the driveshaft is different from the second material, Bridges discloses a coupling system (see Figure 1) having a rotor (female spline) with an inner spline, and a splined spacer (spline insert) having an inner spline and an outer spline, the inner spline of the splined spacer forming a splined connection with a spline of the driveshaft (main spline) such that the splined spacer is coaxially positioned about the driveshaft, the outer spline of the splined spacer configured to form a splined connection with the inner spline of the female spline. The driveshaft is formed of a first material (see column 3 lines 31-34) and the splined spacer is formed of a second material (see column 3 lines 40-45), the first and second materials being different.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the track driveshaft of Mallette et al., as modified, to be formed from a first material and the splined spacer to be formed of a second material as taught by Bridges so that the splined spacer is comprised of a harder material and is capable of withstanding more force generated from the driveshaft to ensure a stronger connection between it and the brake rotor.
Regarding Claim 2, Bridges further discloses that the second material has a higher hardness than the first material (see column 3 lines 31-45 and the material of the carbon-carbon insert).
Regarding Claim 3, Mallette et al., as modified, does not disclose that the first material is aluminum and the second material is steel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the first material of the track driveshaft of Mallette et al., as modified, to be aluminum and the second of the spacer to be steel as a matter of design preference dependent upon the desired strength and rigidity of the driveshaft and the spacer and the intended operating environment of the braking system.
Regarding Claim 17, see Claim 1 above and further note that Mallette et al disclose a snowmobile 20 having a chassis 16, a prime mover 42 coupled to the chassis 16 (see Figures 71-74), and a track driveshaft 103 having an outer spline105/106, the track driveshaft 103 receiving rotational energy from the prime mover 42.
Regarding Claim 18, note that Burgoon et al further disclose that the splined spacer 12 is axially sized to allow axial movement of the brake rotor 14 relative to the track driveshaft (see Claim 1 above and Figures 10 and 14 of Burgoon et al).
Regarding Claim 19, Burgoon et al further disclose that the inner spline 20 of the brake rotor 14 has an axial length and the splined spacer 12 has an axial length (see Figure 1 of Burgoon et al).
However, Burgoon et al do not specifically disclose that the axial length of the inner spline of the brake rotor is less than the axial length of the splined spacer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the axial length of the inner spline of the brake rotor of Mallette et al., as modified, to be less than the axial length of the spacer as a matter of design preference dependent upon the size constraints of the braking assembly and the desired engagement between the brake rotor and the spacer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-16 and 20 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 4,489,801 to Marier, U.S. Patent No. 4,520,890 to Marier, PG Publication No. 2025/0269828 to Hurd et al., Canadian Patent No. CA 3105419 to Krings et al., and European Patent No. EP 4552965 to Koynov all disclose braking systems similar to applicant’s.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
PAMELA RODRIGUEZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/PAMELA RODRIGUEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 05/26/26
Prosecution Insights