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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
reference character “60” has been used to designate both “a rotor” in paragraph 0044 and “the modulation ring” in paragraph 0048;
reference character “62” is used to designate “a stator” in paragraph 0041, “an interposed magnetic modulation ring” in paragraph 0044, and “the modulation ring” in paragraphs 0044, 0045, 0049, 0052, and 0053.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “drivetrain” in claim 1 is used by the claim to mean “powertrain,” while the accepted meaning is “drivetrains are subsets of powertrains”. Drivetrains do not have engines/prime movers, whereas powertrains do have engines/prime movers. The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Claims 10 and 20 both recite the limitation "the second power transmission unit" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Examiner will interpret the term “the second power transmission unit” as “the second transmission unit” in claims 10 and 20 for purposes of examination.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the powershift traversing unit" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner will interpret the term “the powershift traversing unit” as “the powershift reversing unit” for purposes of examination.
Any claim not specifically addressed under 112(b) is rejected as being dependent on a claim rejected under 112(b).
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 5, 7 – 9, 14, 15, and 17 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu et al (US 2012/0277059 A1), hereinafter Akutsu, in view of Jian et al (CN 106183765 B), hereinafter Jian, and further in view of Jungmayr et al (US 2021/0265905 A1), hereinafter Jungmayr.
Regarding claim 1 (see rejection for claim 14), claim 14 contains all limitations of claim 1. Claim 1 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 14.
Regarding claim 2, Akutsu as modified above further discloses the drivetrain of claim 1, further comprising [a control unit 2, 41, 42, 43 configured to operate the drivetrain] (Akutsu – paragraph 0571).
Regarding claim 3, Akutsu as modified above further discloses the drivetrain of claim 1, further comprising [a set of power electronics 41, 42, 43, 44 in order to transmit the electrical power between the first electric machine 3, the energy store 44, and the stator 73 of the magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stage 71] (Akutsu – paragraphs 0460 – 0462 & 0571).
Regarding claim 4, Akutsu as modified above further discloses the drivetrain of claim 1, wherein [the output shaft 62 is a hollow shaft and the input shaft 61 is arranged in the output shaft 62such that the output shaft 62 is coaxial with respect to the input shaft 61] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0205).
Regarding claim 5 (see rejection for claim 15), claim 15 contains all limitations of claim 5 and parent claim 1. Claim 5 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 15.
Regarding claim 7 (see rejection for claim 17), claim 17 contains all limitations of claim 7 and parent claim 1. Claim 7 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 17.
Regarding claim 8 (see rejection for claim 18), depending on claim 7, depending on claim 1, claim 18 contains all limitations of claim 8 and parent claims 7 and 1. Claim 8 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 18.
Regarding claim 9 (see rejection for claim 19), depending on claim 7, depending on claim 1, claim 19 contains all limitations of claim 9 and parent claims 7 and 1. Claim 9 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 19.
Regarding claim 14, Akutsu discloses [a vehicle VE8 having a drivetrain] (Akutsu – Fig. 55), comprising:
[a first electric machine 3] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0572, “an electric motor”);
[an input shaft 61 connected to the first electric machine] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraphs 0459);
[an output shaft 62] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0459); and
[a magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stage 71 including a rotor 74 connected to the input shaft 61, a stator 73, and an interposed modulation ring 75 connected to the output shaft 62] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0055, “…75…disposed between…73 and…74”; paragraph 0261 discloses that 75 is comprised of “a soft magnetic material, such as a laminate of a plurality of steel plates”; paragraph 0459);
[the energy store 44 being connected to the stator 73 such that electrical power can be transmitted from the energy store 44 to the stator 73] (Akutsu – Fig. 56; paragraph 0460, “…stator 73 is electrically connected to the battery 44”), [such that the drivetrain can be operated in a forward and a reverse traction mode] (Akutsu – paragraph 0319 discloses “a second rotating magnetic field” is generated in the magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stage 71 by supplying electric power to the stator 73; paragraph 0321 discloses a rotational speed of the second rotating magnetic field of 71 as NMF2, Figs. 59 & 60 disclose NMF2 operating in a “direction of normal rotation”; Figs. 57 & 58 disclose NMF2 operating in a “direction of reverse rotation”; Fig. 55 & paragraph 0459 disclose 71 is mechanically connected to drive wheels DW; using the above information, one skilled in the art would understand that the drivetrain can be operated in forward and reverse traction modes), however Akutsu does not explicitly disclose the energy store is connected to the first electric machine or that the input shaft and the output shaft rotate in opposite directions.
Jian discloses [an energy store 402] (Fig. 1; paragraph 0028, “402-Battery”) connected to [a first electric machine 200] (Fig. 1; paragraph 0031, “a first motor”; paragraph 0011 discloses the first electric machine 200 is connected to the energy store 402).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art of connecting a battery to multiple electric machines, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use what Jian teaches regarding the first electric machine 200 (Jian) being connected to the energy store 402 (Jian) to similarly connect the first electric machine 3 of Akutsu to the energy store 44 of Akutsu, which is within the skill of an ordinary artisan.
Jungmayr (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 0023 – 0027) discloses a magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stage, which is connected to an electric machine, that is substantially similar to the magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stage that Akutsu (Fig. 55) discloses. Jungmayr (paragraph 0027) further discloses that it was well known in the art of magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stages, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stages can operate such that their respective output shafts are rotatable counter to the direction of rotation of their respective input shafts.
Regarding claim 15, Akutsu as modified above further discloses the vehicle of claim 14, wherein [the first electric machine 71 is connected via the input shaft 61 to a power take-off 31] (Akutsu – paragraph 0459; Fig. 55; paragraph 0037 discloses that the power take-off 31 is “an accessory” and is driven by input of motive power), and [the modulation ring 75 is connected via the output shaft 62 to an axle 7] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0459, “…75…mechanically directly connected…via…62, and…mechanically connected to…DW…via…CH, …PGS, …DG”; paragraph 0156, “ DG…comprises…side gears DS…DS…connected to…DW…via …axle 7”).
Regarding claim 17, Akutsu as modified above further discloses the vehicle of claim 14, further comprising [a first transmission unit PGS] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraphs 0207 & 0459) and [a second transmission unit 91] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0037).
Regarding claim 18, Akutsu as modified above discloses all limitations, including the vehicle of claim 17, wherein [at least one of the first transmission unit PGS and the second transmission unit 91 includes a reverse gear] (See rejection of claim 14, specifically that the drivetrain of Akutsu can be operated in a forward and a reverse traction mode, which one skilled in the art of magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stages would understand as the vehicle of claim 17 having at least a forward gear and a reverse gear).
Regarding claim 19, Akutsu as modified above discloses all limitations, including the vehicle of claim 17, wherein [the first electric machine 3 is connected via the input shaft 61 to the second transmission unit 91, and the modulation ring 75 is connected via the output shaft 62 to the first transmission unit PGS] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0459; paragraph 0207).
Claims 6, 10, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu, in view of Jian, further in view of Jungmayr, and further in view of Akutsu.
Regarding claim 6 (see rejection for claim 16), claim 16 contains all limitations of claim 6 and parent claim 1. Claim 6 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 16.
Regarding claim 10 (see rejection for claim 20), the drivetrain of claim 7 depending on claim 1; claim 20 contains all limitations of claim 10 and parent claims 7 and 1. Claim 10 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 20.
Regarding claim 16, Akutsu as modified above discloses the vehicle of claim 14, but does not disclose that the first electric machine 3 is connected via the input shaft 61 to an axle, and the modulation ring 75 is connected via the output shaft 62 to a power take-off.
Akutsu discloses [a vehicle VE5] (Fig. 38) wherein [an electric machine 21 is connected via another input shaft 6 to an axle 7] (Akutsu – Fig. 38; paragraphs 0155 – 0157; Examiner interprets the axle 7 in Fig. 38 to be equivalent to numbered element 7 in Fig. 55), and [another modulation ring 95 is connected via another output shaft 4 to a power take-off 31] (Akutsu – paragraph 0037 discloses the power take-off 31 as “an accessory” and is driven by input of motive power; paragraph 0373, “95…is mechanically connected to…31”).
Using what Akutsu discloses about the vehicle VE5 above, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of claim 14 such that PU1 and SP1 in Fig. 55 (Akutsu) are switched and PU1 remains connected to PU2 and SP1 remains connected to SP2. Doing so would switch connections of the input shaft 61 and the output shaft 62 of the vehicle of claim 14 such that the first electric machine 3 would be connected via the input shaft 61 to the axle 7, and the modulation ring 75 would be connected, via the output shaft 62, to the power take-off 31.
One skilled in the art could do so using known methods, expecting predictable results, and would appreciate the ability to control the amount of power sent from the modulation ring 75 to the power take-off 31 via the output shaft 62. One skilled in the art would further appreciate a simpler connection between the first electric machine 3 and the axle 7 via the input shaft 61 while also maintaining control of the amount of power sent to the axle by operation of [element referenced by characters “PGS”] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraphs 0207 & 0459). Examiner notes that the above modifications would connect the first electric machine 3, via the input shaft 61, to PGS.
Regarding claim 20, Akutsu as modified above further discloses the vehicle of claim 17, wherein [the modulation ring 75 is connected via the output shaft 62 to the second power transmission unit 91] (Akutsu – Fig. 55; paragraph 0459); claim 16 contains all remaining limitations (see rejection for claim 16, specifically the modification of the vehicle of claim 14, wherein the first electric machine 3 is connected via the input shaft 61 to PGS, i.e., the first electric machine 3 is connected via the input shaft 61 to the first transmission unit PGS).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu, in view of Jian, further in view of Jungmayr, and further in view of Rack (EP 0246511 A2).
Regarding claim 11, Akutsu as modified above discloses the drivetrain of claim 1, but does not disclose a powershift reversing unit.
Rack discloses [a powershift reversing unit] (Fig. 1; paragraph 0010, “…a powershift reversing transmission…”) [for reversing the direction of travel] (paragraph 0017, discloses the powershift reversing unit causes an output shaft to rotate in a direction opposite to an input shaft at a ratio of 1 to -1). Rack further discloses [the powershift reversing unit has a planetary gear set] (Figs. 1 & 2; paragraph 0011).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the powershift reversing unit of Rack into the drivetrain of claim 1 using known methods because doing so would bring no change to the functionality of the powershift reversing unit of Rack, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, one skilled in the art of powershift reversing units would understand that doing so would advantageously provide the ability to instantaneously shift between forward and reverse directions without using a clutch or having to stop.
Regarding claim 12, Akutsu as modified above discloses all limitations, including the drivetrain of claim 11, wherein [the powershift traversing unit has a planetary gear set] (see rejection of claim 11, depending on claim 1, specifically Rack’s further disclosure of the planetary gear set).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu, in view of Jian, further in view of Jungmayr, and further in view of Glaser et al (US 2010/0170732 A1), hereinafter Glaser.
Regarding claim 13, Akutsu as modified above discloses the drivetrain of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose connections between front and rear axles, although Akutsu does disclose [a differential gear DG] (Fig. 55; paragraph 0142) [comprising left and right side gears DS having gear teeth, and side gears DS are connected to left and right axles 7] (Fig. 55; paragraph 0156).
Glaser discloses [a rear-axle bevel gear drive 20 is connected to an output shaft 84] (Fig. 2; paragraph 0049), and [the output shaft 84 is connected to a toothing of a front-axle drive 18] (Fig. 2; paragraph 0039 discloses “front axles and rear axles with bevel gears” and one skilled in the art would understand that bevel gears have teething; paragraph 0053 discloses the output shaft 84 is connected to a shaft 102; paragraph 0052 discloses the shaft 102 is connected to a shaft 110 and the shaft 110 transmits mechanical torque to the toothing, e.g., of a bevel gear, of the front-axle drive 18).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use known methods to combine both the front-axle drive 18 and the rear-axle bevel gear drive 20 of Glaser with the drivetrain of claim 1 such that the rear-axle bevel gear drive 20 (Glaser) is connected to the output shaft 62 (Akutsu) of the drivetrain of claim 1, and the output shaft 62 (Akutsu) of the drivetrain of claim 1 is connected to the toothing of the front-axle drive 18 (Glaser).
Doing so would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art, and would advantageously allow the drivetrain of claim 1 to deliver motive power to two axles. Furthermore, bevel gears are well known in the art of drivetrains. One skilled in the art would use bevel gears to transmit motive power to axles of drivetrains because of at least one of the following: bevel gears are in widespread use, availability of replacement parts, and/or maintenance schedules of drivetrain components comprising bevel gears are well known in the art of drivetrains.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2722617 A – Discloses various arrangements of magnetic gears.
US 20140183996 A1 – discloses various arrangements of drivetrains having magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stages.
US 20160359441 A1 – Discloses a drive system with a magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission substantially similar to Applicant’s claimed invention.
US 20180231105 A1 – A drivetrain with a magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stage.
US 20190344655 A1 – A vehicle having a powertrain.
US 20200400217 A1 – Powershift transmission.
US 20210199180 A1 – Discloses a magnetic-electrical epicyclic transmission stage.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tyler Ferguson whose telephone number is (571)272-7374. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at 571-272-6265. 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.
/Tyler Ferguson/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/CHRISTOPHER B WEHRLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611