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 .
Status of Claims
This Final Office Action is in response to the amendment filed on March 11th, 2026 for application no. 18/469,340 filed on September 18th, 2023. Claims 1-23 are pending. In the present amendment, claims 1-2, 8, 14-15 and 23 are amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oswald (US 4,278,140).
Regarding Claim 1, Oswald teaches a construction vehicle (Fig. 14, “backhoe” 198; Abstract – “A detachable undercarriage for use on adverse terrain vehicles”) comprising:
a core (Examiner Fig. 1, frame “F” and both undercarriage “10”; col. 3, line 29 – “Normally, of course, a pair of parallel undercarriages 10 are employed to support the adverse terrain vehicle” emphasis added) defining a top, a bottom opposite the top (see Examiner Fig. 1), the core (F, both of 10) including:
a frame (F),
a drive motor (Figs. 1-2, “motor” 30) coupled to the frame (F),
PNG
media_image1.png
214
617
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Fig. 1 – Fig. 14 of Oswald
wherein the drive motor (30) defines a drive axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad), and
a drive assembly (“drive assembly” 28; col. 4, line 19 – “power transmission by means of the pressurized hydraulic fluid from the aforementioned pumps, or from a remote power source (not shown) in the case of an electric motor, to motor 30 and hence to drive sprocket 48 through speed reducer 40 comprises the hydrostatic drive system which functions to both propel and steer undercarriage 10” emphasis added) coupled to the core (F, both of 10), the drive assembly (28) including:
a housing (housing portion of one of 10) removably couplable to the frame (F);
a first load-bearing wheel (“wheel” 24) coupled to the housing (housing portion of the one of 10) defining a first axis of rotation (Examiner Fig. 2, A1), and
a second load-bearing wheel (“middle wheel” 22) coupled to the housing (housing portion of the one of 10) defining a second axis of rotation (A2),
wherein together the first axis of rotation (A1) and the second axis of rotation (A2) define a centerline plane (PC), and
wherein the first axis of rotation (A1) and the second axis of rotation (A2) define an intermediate zone therebetween (between A1 and A2); and
wherein the drive axis (Ad) is positioned between the centerline plane (PC) and the top of the core (F, both of 10), and
wherein the drive axis (Ad) is positioned outside the intermediate zone (between A1 and A2; see Examiner Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
563
872
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner Fig. 2 – Figs. 1-2 of Oswald
Regarding Claim 2, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
wherein the first load-bearing wheel (Figs. 1-2, 24) and the second load-bearing wheel (22) each support a respective tire (see Figs. 1-2) thereon.
Regarding Claim 4, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
further comprising a power generator (Fig. 14, “engine” 200) configured to provide energy to the drive motor (Figs. 1-2, 30; see col. 4, line 19 passage above).
Regarding Claim 5, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
wherein the drive motor (Figs. 1-2, 30) includes an output shaft (“output shaft” 46) rotatable about the drive axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad), and
wherein the construction vehicle (198) further comprises a sprocket (“drive sprocket” 48) attached to the output shaft (46) for rotation together therewith (see Figs. 1-2).
Regarding Claim 6, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 5,
wherein the drive assembly (Figs. 1-2, 28) includes at least one of a belt and a chain (“chain” 52) in operable communication with the sprocket (48) and configured to transmit torque between the drive motor (30) and at least one of the first load-bearing wheel (24) and the second load-bearing wheel (22).
Regarding Claim 7, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 5,
further comprising a transmission (Figs. 1-2, “speed reducer” 40) operably positioned between the drive motor (30) and the sprocket (48).
Regarding Claim 8, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
wherein the housing (Figs. 1-2, housing portion of the one of 10) is configured to transmit loads between the first and second load-bearing wheels (24, 22) and the frame (Examiner Fig. 1, F; see Figs. 1-2 and 14).
Regarding Claim 9, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 8,
wherein the housing (Figs. 1-2, housing portion of the one of 10) defines a volume therein (see Figs. 1-2), and wherein the volume is at least partially filled with oil (col. 3, line 41 – “Drain plugs 14 and 16 are located at the bottom and outside surfaces, respectively, of frame 12 to facilitate draining or replenishing of lubricants therein”).
Regarding Claim 11, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
further comprising a bucket assembly (Fig. 14, “bucket” 202) coupled to the core (Examiner Fig. 1, F, both of 10).
Regarding Claim 12, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
wherein the drive motor (Figs. 1-2, 30) is a first drive motor (30),
wherein the drive axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad) is a first drive axis (Ad), and
wherein the drive assembly (28) is a first drive assembly (28),
the construction vehicle (Fig. 14, 198) further comprising a second drive motor (30) coupled to the frame (Examiner Fig. 1, F) that defines a second drive axis (Examiner Fig. 1, Ad), and
a second drive assembly (28) coupled to the core (F, both of 10; see col. 3, line 29 passage above).
Regarding Claim 14, Oswald teaches a construction vehicle (Fig. 14, 198) comprising:
a core (Examiner Fig. 1, F, both of 10; see col. 3, line 29 passage above) including:
a frame (F),
a drive motor (Figs. 1-2, 30) coupled to the frame (F),
wherein the drive motor (30) defines a drive axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad), and
a drive assembly mounting point (bottom of F seen in Examiner Fig. 1);
a bucket assembly (202) coupled to the core (F, both of 10);
a wheeled drive assembly (Figs. 1-2, 28) removably couplable to the drive assembly mounting point (bottom of F), the wheeled drive assembly (28) including:
a wheel housing (housing portion of one of 10),
a first wheel (24) rotatably coupled to the wheel housing (housing portion of the one of 10) for rotation with respect thereto, and
a first input axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad) defined by the wheeled drive assembly (28),
wherein the first input axis (Ad) is co-axial with the drive axis (Ad) when the wheeled drive assembly (28) is coupled to the drive assembly mounting point (bottom of F seen in Examiner Fig. 1; also see Examiner Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 14,
wherein the wheeled drive assembly (Figs. 1-2, 28) includes an input sprocket (48), and
wherein the input sprocket (48) defines the first input axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad).
Regarding Claim 17, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 14,
wherein the wheel housing (Figs. 1-2, housing portion of the one of 10) is couplable to the drive assembly mounting point (bottom of F seen in Examiner Fig. 1) to convey forces between the first wheel (24) and the frame (F).
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 8-9, 11-15, 17, 20-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt (US 12,459,349), in view of Oswald (US 4,278,140).
Regarding Claim 1, Schmidt teaches a construction vehicle (see Figs. 2-3 and 9-15, “power machine” 400) comprising:
a core (Fig. 10B, “frame” 410 and “cab” 450) defining a top, a bottom opposite the top, the core (410, 450) including:
a frame (410),
a drive motor (Figs. 9-15, “second motor sub-assembly” 444B) coupled to the frame (410),
wherein the drive motor (444B) defines a drive axis (Figs. 11-12, “second drive axis” 489B), and
PNG
media_image3.png
399
643
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner Fig. 3 – Fig. 14 of Schmidt
a drive assembly (“second drivetrain assembly” 446B) coupled to the core (410, 450), the drive assembly (446B) including:
a housing (“chain case” 504B) couplable to the frame (410);
a first load-bearing wheel (Fig. 15, “second axle sprocket” 540B) coupled to the housing (504B) defining a first axis of rotation (Examiner Fig. 4, A1), and
a second load-bearing wheel (“first axle sprocket” 540C) coupled to the housing (504B) defining a second axis of rotation (A2),
wherein together the first axis of rotation (A1) and the second axis of rotation (A2) define a centerline plane (PC; see Examiner Fig. 4), and
wherein the first axis of rotation (A1) and the second axis of rotation (A2) define an intermediate zone therebetween (between A1 and A2); and
wherein the drive axis (489B) is positioned between the centerline plane (PC) and the top of the core (top of 410 and 450; see Figs. 11-12 and Examiner Figs. 3-4),
and wherein the drive axis (489B) is positioned outside the intermediate zone (between A1 and A2; see Figs. 11-12 and Examiner Figs. 3-4).
PNG
media_image4.png
350
782
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner Fig. 4 – Fig. 15 of Schmidt
Schmidt does not teach “the drive assembly including: a housing removably couplable to the frame”. In other words, Schmidt does not explicitly disclose if a wheel housing (504B) is removably attached to the frame (410).
Oswald teaches a wheel housing (Figs. 1-2, housing portion of one of 10) is removably coupled to a frame (Examiner Fig, 1, F; see Figs. 11-14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to removably provide the wheel housing taught by Schmidt as suggested by Oswald, such that “the drive assembly including: a housing removably couplable to the frame”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, and have the obvious advantage of increasing the marketability of the construction vehicle taught by Schmidt by providing interchangeable drive systems suitable for different vehicle applications. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(C) – Making Separable.
Regarding Claim 2, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 1, Schmidt teaches wherein the first load-bearing wheel (Fig. 15, 540B) and the second load-bearing wheel (540C) each support a respective tire (Fig. 2, “tractive elements” 219) thereon.
Regarding Claim 4, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 1, Schmidt teaches further comprising a power generator (not shown) configured to provide energy to the drive motor (Fig. 13, 444B; col. 12, line 66 – “the power system 220 includes an internal combustion engine. Other power machines, including those presented below, can include electric generators, rechargeable batteries, various other power sources or any combination of power sources that can provide power for given power machine components”).
Regarding Claim 8, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 1, Schmidt teaches wherein the housing (Figs. 10-15, 504B) is configured to transmit loads between the first and second load-bearing wheels (540B, 540C) and the frame (410; col. 22, line 63 – “the first and second chain cases 504A, 504B (see FIGS. 10A and 12) are enclosed within the first and second lateral sides 462, 464, respectively, of the frame 410”).
Regarding Claim 9, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 8.
Schmidt does not teach “wherein the housing defines a volume therein, and wherein the volume is at least partially filled with oil”. In other words, Schmidt does not explicitly disclose a chain drive lubrication system.
Oswald teaches a chain case housing (Figs. 1-2, housing portion of 10) defines a volume therein (see Figs. 1-2), and wherein the volume is at least partially filled with oil (col. 3, line 41 – “Drain plugs 14 and 16 are located at the bottom and outside surfaces, respectively, of frame 12 to facilitate draining or replenishing of lubricants therein”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the drive assembly taught by Schmidt with the chain drive lubrication system taught by Oswald, such that “wherein the housing defines a volume therein, and wherein the volume is at least partially filled with oil”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in combining known elements, and have the obvious advantage of lubricating the drive assembly taught by Schmidt.
Regarding Claim 11, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 1, Schmidt teaches further comprising a bucket assembly (Fig. 2, “implement interface” 270 and col. 12, line 35 – “Some power machines can have implements or implement like devices attached to it such as by being pinned to a lift arm with a tilt actuator also coupled directly to the implement or implement type structure. A common example of such an implement that is rotatably pinned to a lift arm is a bucket, with one or more tilt cylinders being attached to a bracket that is fixed directly onto the bucket such as by welding or with fasteners. Such a power machine does not have an implement carrier, but rather has a direct connection between a lift arm and an implement” emphasis added) coupled to the core (410, 450).
Regarding Claim 12, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 1, Schmidt teaches wherein the drive motor (Figs. 9-15, 444B) is a first drive motor (444B),
wherein the drive axis (489B) is a first drive axis (489B), and
wherein the drive assembly (446B) is a first drive assembly (446B),
the construction vehicle (400) further comprising a second drive motor (444A) coupled to the frame (410) that defines a second drive axis (489A), and a second drive assembly (446A) coupled to the core (410, 450).
Regarding Claim 13, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 12, Schmidt teaches wherein the first drive axis (Figs. 11-12, 489B) is coaxial with the second drive axis (489A).
Regarding Claim 14, Schmidt teaches a construction vehicle (Figs. 2-3 and 9-15, 400) comprising:
a core (410, 450) including:
a frame (410),
a drive motor (444B) coupled to the frame (410),
wherein the drive motor (444B) defines a drive axis (489B), and
a drive assembly mounting point (portion of 410 that receives 504B);
a bucket assembly (270 and the bucket not shown in Figs. 1-2; see col. 12, line 35 passage above) coupled to the core (410, 450);
a wheeled drive assembly (446B) couplable to the drive assembly mounting point (portion of 410 that receives 504B), the wheeled drive assembly (446B) including:
a wheel housing (504B),
a first wheel (Fig. 15, 540B) rotatably coupled to the wheel housing (504B) for rotation with respect thereto, and
a first input axis (489B) defined by the wheeled drive assembly (446B),
wherein the first input axis (489B) is co-axial with the drive axis (489B) when the wheeled drive assembly (446B) is coupled to the drive assembly mounting point (portion of 410 that receives 504B; see Figs. 12-13).
Schmidt does not teach “a wheeled drive assembly removably couplable to the drive assembly mounting point”. In other words, Schmidt does not explicitly disclose if the wheel housing (504B) is removably attached to the frame (410).
Oswald teaches a wheel housing (Figs. 1-2, housing portion of 10) is removably coupled to a frame (Examiner Fig, 1, F; see Figs. 11-14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to removably provide the wheeled drive assembly taught by Schmidt as suggested by Oswald, such that “a wheeled drive assembly removably couplable to the drive assembly mounting point”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, and have the obvious advantage of increasing the marketability of the construction vehicle taught by Schmidt by providing interchangeable drive systems suitable for different vehicle applications. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(C) – Making Separable.
Regarding Claim 15, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 14.
Schmidt does not teach “wherein the wheeled drive assembly includes an input sprocket and wherein the input sprocket defines the first input axis”; however, Schmidt does teach “In some examples, the first motor sub-assembly can include a drive sprocket that can be arranged to rotate about the power transmission axis to transmit rotational power” (col. 3, line 1).
Oswald teaches a wheeled drive assembly (Figs. 1-2, 28) includes an input sprocket (48), and wherein the input sprocket (48) defines a first input axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the wheeled drive assembly taught by Schmidt with the input sprocket taught by Oswald, such that “wherein the wheeled drive assembly includes an input sprocket and wherein the input sprocket defines the first input axis”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in combining known elements, and have the obvious advantage of reliably transferring torque to the wheels taught by Schmidt.
Regarding Claim 17, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 14, Schmidt teaches wherein the wheel housing (Figs. 12-13 and 15, 504B) is couplable to the drive assembly mounting point (portion of 410 that receives 504B) to convey forces between the first wheel (540B) and the frame (410).
Regarding Claim 20, Schmidt teaches a construction vehicle (Figs. 2-3 and 9-15, 400) comprising:
a frame (410) defining a frame volume (see Figs. 9-15);
a drive motor (444B) coupled to the frame (410) and at least partially positioned within the frame volume (see Figs. 9-15),
the drive motor (444B) defining a drive axis (489B);
a wheel housing (504B) defining a housing volume therein (see Figs. 12-13),
wherein the housing volume (504B) is separate from the frame volume (410; see Figs. 12-13), and
wherein the wheel housing (504B) is coupled to the frame (410);
a first wheel (Fig. 15, 540B) rotatably mounted to the wheel housing (504B) for rotation with respect thereto about a first axis (Examiner Fig. 4, A1),
a second wheel (540C) rotatably mounted to the wheel housing (504B) for rotation with respect thereto about a second axis (A2).
Schmidt does not teach “wherein the wheel housing is removably coupled to the frame”. In other words, Schmidt does not explicitly disclose if the wheel housing (504B) is removably attached to the frame (410).
Oswald teaches a wheel housing (Figs. 1-2, housing portion of 10) is removably coupled to a frame (see Figs. 11-14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to removably provide the wheel housing taught by Schmidt as suggested by Oswald, such that “wherein the wheel housing is removably coupled to the frame”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, and have the obvious advantage of increasing the marketability of the construction vehicle taught by Schmidt by providing interchangeable drive systems suitable for different vehicle applications. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(C) – Making Separable.
Regarding Claim 21, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 20.
Schmidt does not teach “wherein the housing volume contains oil therein”. In other words, Schmidt does not explicitly disclose a chain drive lubrication system.
Oswald teaches a chain case housing volume (Figs. 1-2, inside the housing portion of 10) contains oil therein (see col. 3, line 41 passage above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the drive assembly taught by Schmidt with the chain drive lubrication system taught by Oswald, such that “wherein the housing volume contains oil therein”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in combining known elements, and have the obvious advantage of lubricating the drive assembly taught by Schmidt.
Regarding Claim 23, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 20, Schmidt teaches wherein the first axis (Examiner Fig. 4, A1) and the second axis (A2) define an intermediate volume therebetween (between A1 and A2), and
wherein the drive axis (Figs. 12-13, 489B) is positioned outside the intermediate volume (between A1 and A2; see Examiner Figs. 3-4).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oswald (US 4,278,140), in view of Schmidt (US 12,459,349).
Regarding Claim 13, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 12.
Oswald does not explicitly teach “wherein the first drive axis is coaxial with the second drive axis”; however, Oswald does teach “a pair of parallel undercarriages 10 are employed to support the adverse terrain vehicle” (col. 3, line 29).
Schmidt teaches a first drive axis (Figs. 11-12, 489B) is coaxial with a second drive axis (489A).
Schmidt also teaches “In some cases, including as shown in FIG. 7, the second motor sub-assembly 344B of the power machine 300 can include a second bearing carrier 348B, a second reduction assembly 342B, and a second drive motor 326B that be arranged similarly to the first motor sub-assembly 344A, but on the opposing lateral side 364 of the power machine 300 (e.g., supported on an opposing side wall of the frame cavity 360). As also discussed below, such a generally symmetrical arrangement can provide various structural and operational benefits, including relative to serviceability (e.g., relative to case of installation and removal of the motor sub-assemblies 344A, 344B)” (col. 17, line 20).
As an obvious matter of design choice, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to symmetrically arrange the first and second drive assemblies taught by Oswald as suggested by Schmidt, such that “wherein the first drive axis is coaxial with the second drive axis”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, and have the obvious advantage of improving serviceability of the first and second drive assemblies taught by Oswald.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt (US 12,459,349), in view of Oswald (US 4,278,140), and in view of Gauthier (FR 2 610 876).
Regarding Claim 22, Schmidt and Oswald teach the construction vehicle of claim 20.
Schmidt or Oswald do not teach “wherein the wheel housing is coupled to the frame by one or more fasteners”. In other words, Oswald does not explicitly disclose how the wheel housing is detachably attached to the frame.
Gauthier a wheel housing (Fig. 2, “sealed casing” 20b) is coupled to a frame (“tubular chassis” 12) by one or more fasteners (see bolted connection in Figs. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to detachably provide the wheel housing and the frame taught by Schmidt and Oswald with the fasteners taught by Gauthier, such that “wherein the wheel housing is coupled to the frame by one or more fasteners”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in combining known elements, and have the obvious advantage of securely and detachably fixing the wheel housing taught by Schmidt and Oswald.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant's arguments filed March 11th, 2026 are in response to the Office Action mailed December 11th, 2025. The Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Response to Claim Objections
Regarding Claim 15, Applicant’s amendment addresses a minor informality previously indicated in the latest Office Action. As such, the claim objection is withdrawn.
Response to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Regarding Claims 2, 14 and 23, Applicant’s amendment has clarified the invention. As such, the relevant 112(b) rejections previously indicated in the latest Office Action are withdrawn.
Response to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and/or 103
Regarding Claims 1 and 14, Applicant’s argument that “Oswald is generally directed to a detachable undercarriage for use on an adverse terrain vehicle where the undercarriage 10 is supported by wheels 18 and includes a motor 30 incorporated therein (see FIG. 16). Indeed, all embodiments of Oswald disclose the motor 30 being incorporated into the undercarriage 10 and not into the frame of the associated adverse terrain vehicle” is not persuasive as Applicant’s use of the recited term “coupled” encompasses indirect couplings similar to the structure disclosed by Oswald. As seen in Fig. 6 of Applicant’s disclosure, the drive motor (28b) is directly coupled to the wheel housing (1162) and indirectly coupled to the mounting point (120b) of the frame (18). Therefore, Oswald clearly teaches a drive motor (Figs. 1-2, 30) coupled to a frame (Examiner Fig. 1; F). See detailed and relevant rejections above.
Regarding Claims 1 and 14, Applicant’s argument that “Furthermore, Schmidt is generally directed to a drivetrain assembly of a power machine. Schmidt fails to teach the presence of a drive assembly including a housing that is removably coupled to the frame of a core where a first wheel is coupled to the housing. Rather, the wheels of Schmidt are incorporated into the frame 310 itself” (p. 7-8) is correct; however, Examiner already stated it would have been obvious to removably provide the wheel housing taught by Schmidt as suggested by Oswald. See new rejections necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
Regarding Claim 20, Applicant’s argument that “As stated on Page 17 of the Office action, the Examiner acknowledges that Schmidt does not teach the generally concept where the wheel housing is removably coupled to the frame. Instead, Examiner relies on Oswald for this feature. However, even when combined, Oswald and Schmidt do not teach or make obvious the device are recited in independent claim 20. Specifically, Oswald and Schmidt, alone or in combination, do not teach a construction vehicle including a drive motor positioned within the frame, and a wheel housing that is removably coupled to the frame” (p. 8) is not persuasive. Again, Applicant’s use of the recited term “coupled” encompasses indirect couplings similar to the structure disclosed by Oswald. As seen in Fig. 6 of Applicant’s disclosure, the drive motor (28b) is directly coupled to the wheel housing (1162) and indirectly coupled to the attachment location (1124) of the frame (18). Therefore, Oswald clearly teaches a drive motor (Figs. 1-2, 30) coupled to a frame (Examiner Fig. 1; F). See detailed and relevant rejections above.
Regarding Claim 20, Applicant’s argument that “Indeed, by moving the drive motor to the frame, the present device is an improvement over both Oswald and Schmidt as it permits the many interfaces required for a drive motor (throttle inputs, fuel inputs, coolant systems, etc.) to remain common and unchanged between the various operating configurations, whereas only the wheel housing needs to be swamped out. Neither Oswald nor Schmidt teach or acknowledge such an advantage or provide any motivation to incorporate such an advantage. Furthermore, there are no teachings within either reference on how to adopt the disclosed devices to incorporate such an advantage without using impermissible hindsight” is not persuasive as the claims do not require that the drive motor be directly coupled to the frame. As seen in Fig. 6 of the Applicant’s disclosure, it is unclear if the drive motor (28b) is directly coupled to the drive assembly mounting point (120b) of the frame (18). See detailed and relevant rejections above.
In conclusion, amended claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-15, 17 and 20-23 are rejected. See detailed and relevant rejections set forth above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James J. Taylor II whose telephone number is (571)272-4074. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
JAMES J. TAYLOR II
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655
/JAMES J TAYLOR II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights