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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 3rd, 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the R.C.E. filed on August 3rd, 2026 for application no. 18/469,340 filed on September 18th, 2023. Claims 1-9, 11-12, 14-18 and 20-26 are pending with claims 3, 16 and 18 withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to a nonelected invention. In the present amendment, claims 1, 8-9 and 16 are amended, claims 24-26 are new, and claims 10, 13 and 19 are canceled.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding Claims 25-26, the recited term “drive coupling” is interpreted as “In the illustrated embodiment, each drive coupling 136 includes an aperture or portal providing direct access to the output shaft 142a, 142b of the corresponding drive motor 28a, 28b…In such embodiments, the drive coupling 136 may provide some form of universal attachment point that is configured for operational attachment to both a wheeled and tracked drive assembly 22a, 22b” as disclosed at paragraph [0052] of the Applicant’s published application. The Applicant may act as their 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 recited term “drive coupling” is used by the claim to mean “aperture or portal”, while the accepted meaning is “a device for connecting parts”. The term is definite because the specification clearly redefines the term “drive coupling”.
Claim Objections
Regarding Claim 1 (line 4), please change the recitation of “a drive motor coupled mounted to the core frame” to - - a drive motor [[coupled]] mounted to the core frame - - to correct a minor informality.
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.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 24, the recitation “wherein the construction vehicle further comprises: a second drive assembly removably coupled to the drive assembly mounting point interchangeably with the first drive assembly, wherein the second drive assembly includes a second drive housing and a load-bearing wheel coupled to the drive housing” lacks proper written description. Applicant has not pointed out where the amended claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitation in the application as filed.
Claim 24 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 24 (last clause), in the recitation of “wherein the construction vehicle further comprises: a second drive assembly removably coupled to the drive assembly mounting point interchangeably with the first drive assembly, wherein the second drive assembly includes a second drive housing and a load-bearing wheel coupled to the drive housing” it is unclear if Applicant intends to redefine the recitation of “a drive assembly removably coupled to the core” (claim 1, line 6). The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the drive assembly mounting point is configured to mount a second drive assembly interchangeable with the first drive assembly, wherein the second drive assembly includes a second drive housing and a load-bearing wheel coupled to the second drive housing” to clarify that the drive assembly mounting point is configured to mount a different drive assembly (i.e., the recited “second drive assembly”) without positively reciting the different drive assembly and negatively reciting a previously recited element (i.e., the “drive assembly” recited in claim 1). Examiner would welcome an interview to discuss the Examiner’s proposal if further explanation is needed.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-15, 17, 20-21 and 23-24 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 core frame (F), and
a drive motor (Figs. 1-2, “speed reducer” 40 and “motor” 30) coupled mounted to the core frame (F),
PNG
media_image1.png
214
617
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Fig. 1 – Fig. 14 of Oswald
wherein the drive motor (40, 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) removably coupled to the core (F, both of 10), the drive assembly (28) including:
a drive housing (housing portion of one of 10) removably couplable to the core frame (F);
a first load-bearing wheel (“wheel” 24) coupled to the drive 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
an input assembly (“drive sprocket” 48 and “output shaft” 46) configured to receive torque from the drive motor (40, 30) when the drive assembly (28) is removably coupled to the core; 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, 40, 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, 40, 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 (40, 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 (40, 30) and the sprocket (48).
Regarding Claim 8, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
wherein the drive 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 drive 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, 40, 30) is a first drive motor (40, 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 (40, 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, 40, 30) coupled to the frame (F),
wherein the drive motor (40, 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).
Regarding Claim 20, Oswald teaches a construction vehicle (Fig. 14, 198) comprising:
a frame (Figs. 1-2, “sealed housing” 54) defining a frame volume (see Figs. 1-2);
a drive motor (40, 30) coupled to the frame (54) and at least partially positioned within the frame volume (see Figs. 1-2), the drive motor (40, 30) defining a drive axis (Examiner Fig. 2, Ad);
a wheel housing (12) defining a housing volume therein (see Figs. 1-2), wherein the housing volume (12) is separate from the frame volume (54; see Figs. 1-2), and
wherein the wheel housing (12) is removably coupled to the frame (54; see Figs. 1-3);
a first wheel (24) rotatably mounted to the wheel housing (12) for rotation with respect thereto about a first axis (Examiner Fig. 2, A1),
a second wheel (22) rotatably mounted to the wheel housing (12) for rotation with respect thereto about a second axis (A2).
Regarding Claim 21, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 20,
wherein the housing volume (Figs. 1-2, 12) contains oil therein (col. 3, line 39 – “Furthermore, frame 12 can be of sealed construction so that it can serve as a lubricant reservoir, if desired, as well as a structural member. 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 23, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 20,
wherein the first axis (Examiner Fig. 2, A1) and the second axis (A1) define an intermediate volume therebetween (see Examiner Fig. 2), and
wherein the drive axis (Ad) is positioned outside the intermediate volume (see Examiner Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 24, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 1,
wherein the core (Examiner Fig. 1; F, 10) includes a drive assembly mounting point (surface for mounting 10),
wherein the drive assembly (28) is a first drive assembly (28) removably couplable to the drive assembly mounting point (see Examiner Fig. 1), and wherein the construction vehicle further comprises:
a second drive assembly (28) removably coupled to the drive assembly mounting point (surface for mounting 10) interchangeably with the first drive assembly (28; see 112(a) and 112(b) rejections),
wherein the second drive assembly (28) includes a second drive housing (housing portion of 10) and a load-bearing wheel (see Examiner Fig. 1) coupled to the drive housing (housing portion of 10; see 112(a) and 112(b) rejections).
Claims 14, 17 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsukamoto (US 2026/0193070).
Regarding Claim 14, Tsukamoto teaches a construction vehicle (Figs. 1-2, “aerial work vehicle” 1) comprising:
a core (at least “vehicle body frame” 3 and “travel unit” 4) including:
a frame (4),
a drive motor (Figs. 3-6, “travel motor” M) coupled to the frame (4), wherein the drive motor (M) defines a drive axis (see Fig. 6), and a drive assembly mounting point (“first connecting portions” 15);
a bucket assembly (“basket” 2) coupled to the core (at least 3 and 4);
a wheeled drive assembly (at least “wheel” 4d and M) removably couplable to the drive assembly mounting point (15), the wheeled drive assembly (at least 4d and M) including:
a wheel housing (“hub” 4d1),
a first wheel (4d) rotatably coupled to the wheel housing (4d1) for rotation with respect thereto (see Fig. 4), and
a first input axis (rotational axis of 4d1 and 4d) defined by the wheeled drive assembly (at least 4d and M),
wherein the first input axis (rotational axis of 4d1 and 4d) is co-axial with the drive axis (rotational axis of M) when the wheeled drive assembly (at least 4d and M) is coupled to the drive assembly mounting point (15).
Regarding Claim 17, Tsukamoto teaches the construction vehicle of claim 14,
wherein the wheel housing (Figs. 3-6, 4d1) is couplable to the drive assembly mounting point (15) to convey forces between the first wheel (4d) and the frame (4).
Regarding Claim 26, Tsukamoto teaches the construction vehicle of claim 14,
wherein the drive assembly mounting point (Fig. 4, 15) includes a drive coupling (aperture portion of 15), and
wherein the drive coupling (15) is configured to serve as a detachable interface to convey torque between the drive motor (M) and the first wheel (4d; see Figs. 3-6).
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 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oswald (US 4,278,140), and in view of Gauthier (FR 2 610 876).
Regarding Claim 22, Oswald teaches the construction vehicle of claim 20,
wherein the wheel housing (Figs. 1-2, 12) is coupled to the frame (54; col. 4, line 31 – “Sprockets 48 and 50 and chain 52 are totally enclosed in a sealed housing 54 which is detachably secured to both frame extension 42 and frame 12”).
Oswald does not explicitly teach “wherein the wheel housing is coupled to the frame by one or more fasteners”.
Gauthier teaches 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 provide the frame and wheel housing taught by 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 frame and wheel housing taught by Oswald.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant's arguments filed August 3rd, 2026 are in response to the Office Action mailed April 1st, 2026 and the interview conducted on June 9th, 2026. The Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Regarding Claim 16, Examiner acknowledges “Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-17, and 20-26 remain actively pending” (p. 7); however, claim 16 is still drawn to a nonelected invention. Therefore, claim 16 remains withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and/or 103
Regarding Claim 1, Applicant’s argument that “With regard to the rejection of claims 1 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 102, Oswald does not disclose each and every element of independent claims 1 and 14. Contrary to the Examiner's indication in the annotated figure on Page 3 of the Office action, the motor 30 of Oswald is clearly shown mounted to the undercarriage 10 and not to the frame "F" (see Annotated FIG. 14, below). As such, the motor 30 of Oswald is not "mounted to the core frame" as claimed in amended claim 1 or "coupled to the frame" as claimed in independent claim 14” (p. 8) is not persuasive. Paragraph [0035] of the Applicant’s published application discloses “The terms “mounted,” “connected” and “coupled” are used broadly and encompass both direct and indirect mounting, connecting and coupling. Further, “connected” and “coupled” are not restricted to physical or mechanical connections or couplings, and can include electrical connections or couplings, whether direct or indirect” (emphasis added). Therefore, the indirect coupling and mounting taught by Oswald is considered reasonable in light of the Applicant’s specification. See detailed and relevant rejections presented above.
Regarding Claims 1, 14 and 20, Applicant’s argument that “Furthermore, the devices recited in claims 1 and 14 are also not anticipated by Schmidt in view of Oswald. Schmidt is generally directed to a power machine 400 where the motor sub-assemblies 444A, B and corresponding drivetrain assemblies 446A, B are all mounted to a common rigid frame 410 (see FIGS. 8-19; "In other words, the first motor subassembly 444A (along with the first drivetrain assembly 446A) is arranged on the frame 410. Similarly, the second motor sub-assembly 444B (along with the second drivetrain assembly 446B) is arranged along the second lateral side of the frame 410."; Col. 19, Ins. 55-64). At no time does Schmidt discuss the capability or desire to have any aspect of the motor sub-assemblies 444A, B, or drivetrain assemblies 446A, B be removable from the frame 410” is persuasive. The 103 rejections of at least claims 1, 14 and 20, reliant upon Schmidt in view of Oswald, are hereby withdrawn.
In conclusion, amended claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-15, 17, 20-24 and 26 are rejected. See detailed and relevant rejections set forth above. Amended claim 25 is objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claim 1. See allowable subject matter set forth below.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 25 is 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.
Reasons for allowance, if applicable, will be the subject of a separate communication to the Applicant or patent owner, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.104 and MPEP § 1302.14.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, Applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The prior art of Goldenberg (US 8,360,178), Hansen (US 8,794,358) and Agnew (US 2023/0124346) listed in the attached "Notice of References Cited" disclose similar vehicles comprising interchangeably wheeled and tracked configurations related to various aspects of the claimed invention.
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