Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/421,122

DRIVETRAIN ASSEMBLY FOR A WORK VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jan 24, 2024
Examiner
FRISBY, KEITH J
Art Unit
3614
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Deere & Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
783 granted / 1011 resolved
+25.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+1.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1032
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§112
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1011 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II (Fig. 4) in the reply filed on March 2, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 2, 4, 5, 7 and 9-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 2, 2026. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because “first housing” should be changed to --first housing of-- in line 2. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). 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. Claims 3 and 8 are 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. Claim 3 suffers from double inclusion, since it can be read to include the same element twice (i.e., “a first end of the tube” is introduced in claim 1, line 3, and then “a first end of the tube” is recited again in claim 3, line 1). MPEP §2173.05(o). This rejection could be overcome by changing “a first” to --the first-- in claim 3, line 1. Claim 3 suffers from double inclusion, since it can be read to include the same element twice (i.e., “a second end of the tube” is introduced in claim 1, line 5, and then “a second end of the tube” is recited again in claim 3, line 2). MPEP §2173.05(o). This rejection could be overcome by changing “a second” to --the second-- in claim 3, line 2. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the opening of the second housing" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This rejection could be overcome by changing “the opening” to --an opening-- in claim 8, line 1. 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. Claims 1, 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishino et al. (US 2005/0204843 A1). Nishino discloses a drivetrain assembly for a work vehicle (“tractor” – see the title; Fig. 1), comprising: a tube 94 enclosing a rotatable shaft 92; a first seal (e.g., the rightmost seal 95, as shown in Fig. 11A) positioned between a first end of the tube and a first housing (said housing including clutch housing 2 – see Fig. 3) of a first gearbox (said first gearbox including the clutch housing 2 and also, optionally, housing frame 4, HST case 12, transmission case 3, and/or differential case 5 – see Figs. 3 and 4); and a second seal (e.g., the leftmost seal 95, as shown in Fig. 11A) positioned between a second end of the tube and a second housing (e.g., 9) of a second gearbox (e.g., at 9 – see Fig. 2), the tube forming a sealed (“a seal ring 95 is provided for water-tight sealing” - paragraph 0064) enclosure for fluid (e.g., air) to flow between the first gearbox and the second gearbox (Fig. 11A). The first end of the tube can move axially with respect to the first gearbox, and the second end of the tube can move axially with respect to the second gearbox (Figs. 11A and 11B). The first end of the tube is positioned in an opening of the first housing, and the first seal is positioned between an exterior surface of the tube and the first housing (Fig. 11A). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Nishino et al. (US 2005/0204843 A1) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nishino et al. (US 2005/0204843 A1) in view of Fujii et al. (US 4,403,676 A). Nishino teaches the limitations of claim 6, as explained above. Nishino further teaches that a retainer (e.g., the stepped portion in the opening of the second housing, as shown in Figs. 11A and 11B) positioned in an opening of the second housing limits axial movement of the second end of the tube (Fig. 11B). If it is found that Nishino does not satisfy the limitations of claim 8, then said limitations would still be obvious in view of Fujii, since Fujii teaches a retainer (e.g., 47) positioned in an opening 3b of a housing 3a, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an invention as taught by Nishino with a retainer as taught by Fujii positioned in an opening of the second housing “so as to retain said outer race of the taper roller bearing 26b therein and so as to prevent it from coming out therefrom” (column 8, lines 27-30). Such a combination would result in an invention as recited in claim 8. All the claimed elements were known in the cited prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results. MPEP §2143(I)(A). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH J FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)270-7802. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM - 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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571)270-5985. 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. /KEITH J FRISBY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 24, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594802
MOTOR VEHICLE WITH MULTI-MODE EXTREME TRAVEL SUSPENSION-SUSPENSION HYDRAULIC DESIGN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583722
Stability System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583413
THREE-DIMENSIONAL AIR BAG
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579918
COVER FINISH ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578063
A vehicle with a cryogenic container and efficient routing of the connection line
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+1.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1011 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month