DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/16/2026 has been entered.
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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-14 and 16-21 are pending in the application. Claim 15 has been cancelled.
-The specification objection has been withdrawn due to applicant amending the abstract accordingly.
-The 102 rejection has been withdrawn due to applicant amending claims 1 and 13 with limitations not disclosed by the prior art or record used in the rejection.
-The 103 rejections as currently written has been withdrawn due to applicant amending claims 1 and 13 with limitations not previously examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments that “the Nagumo could not be used in a system with an elliptical bearing. The array of pins in Nagumo are rigidly connected with each other and concentric with the rings, and could not be used with an elliptical bearing because doing so would end up deforming the rigid structure of the array of pins (i.e., the array of pins in Nagumo would break). The design of Nagumo simply does not provide the leeway provided by the claimed invention that enables the use of an elliptical bearing.” has been fully considered and is persuasive. The 103 rejection of claims 3 and 18 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 13, 14 and 17-21 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
-Claims 1 and 13 recite the limitations “the number of roll rings in the plurality of roll rings is one or more less than the number of lobes in the lobe ring”. However, the specification in paragraph [0086] describes that the number of lobes is one or two more or less than the number of roll rings. The scope of the specification only covers up to “two” more or less, but the claims using only the term “more” would seem to suggest that the roll rings could be one, two, three or more less than the lobes, which isn’t covered by the specification as originally filed. The examiner suggest applicant amend claim to recite “the number of roll rings in the plurality of roll rings is one or two less than the number of lobes in the lobe ring” as covered by the specification.
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 1-5, 7-9, 13, 14 and 17-21 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.
-Claims 1 and 13 recite the limitations “the number of roll rings in the plurality of roll rings is one or more less than the number of lobes in the lobe ring”. However, the specification in paragraph [0086] describes that the number of lobes is one or two more or less than the number of roll rings. The scope of the specification only covers up to “two” more or less, but the claims using only the term “more” would seem to suggest that the roll rings could be one, two, three or more less than the lobes, which isn’t covered by the specification as originally filed. The examiner suggest applicant amend claim to recite “the number of roll rings in the plurality of roll rings is one or two less than the number of lobes in the lobe ring” as covered by the specification.
-Claims 1 and 13 recites the limitation “the number of roll rings in the plurality of roll rings is one or more less than the number of lobes in the lobe ring”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggest applicant change “the number” to “a number” accordingly to correct antecedent basis of limitation in claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagumo 20120100949 in view of Scheuer 1870875 (both previously cited). As to claim 1, Nagumo discloses a torque multiplier, comprising: a first shaft for providing a first torque (2); a second shaft for providing a second torque (7); and a gear structure (via 6, 3 (32)) coupled to the first shaft and the second shaft to multiply the first torque to generate the second torque ([0111] describes that input to output can be in either direction), the gear structure comprising: a plurality of roll rings (41, 51); a lobe ring (3, 6) in contact with the plurality of roll rings, the lobe ring comprising (i) an inner circumference comprising modified hypotrochoidal lobes ([0109], Table 2) wherein the plurality of roll rings is configured to move eccentrically with respect to the first shaft and the number of roll rings in the plurality of roll rings is one or more less than the number of lobes in the lobe ring ([0084] discloses in the internally toothed gear 6, internal teeth of the hypotrochoid type are formed at a predetermined pitch in which the number of the teeth is 24, which is larger by one than the number of the meshing external teeth represented by the roll rings/pins 5, 51) or (ii) an outer circumference comprising modified epitrochoidal lobes ([0109], Table 2) wherein the lobe ring is configured to move concentrically with respect to the first shaft; a pin structure comprising a plurality of pins (40, 50), each of the pins located inside one of the roll rings; and a bearing in contact with the plurality of roll rings (bearing 81 is indirectly in contact with at least rings 41 via contact with 3). However, Nagumo doesn’t disclose the plurality of roll rings moving eccentrically with respect to the pins as recited.
Scheuer discloses a torque multiplier, comprising: a first shaft (1) for providing a first torque; a second shaft (9) for providing a second torque; and a gear structure coupled to the first shaft and the second shaft to multiply the first torque to generate the second torque, the gear structure comprising: a plurality of roll rings (20); a lobe ring (7) in contact with the plurality of roll rings, the lobe ring comprising (i) an inner circumference comprising modified lobes wherein the plurality of roll rings is configured to move eccentrically with respect to the first shaft; a pin structure comprising a plurality of pins (21), each of the pins located inside one of the roll ring; and a bearing (2, 3, 4) in contact with the plurality of roll rings. Scheuer shows that it is well known in the art to provide the plurality of roll rings moving eccentrically with respect to the plurality of pins (lines 27-29).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide eccentric movement between the roll rings and pins in Nagumo in view of Scheuer to increase tangential force between the components coupled to the first and second shafts resulting in greater operating efficiency of torque multiplier.
As to claim 2, Nagumo discloses wherein the bearing is eccentric (via motion of 22 and 3; [0089]).
As to claim 4, Nagumo discloses wherein the bearing further comprises a first race in contact with the plurality of roll rings (outer portion of bearing 81 indirectly in contact with at least rings 41 via contact with 3).
As to claim 5, Nagumo discloses wherein the bearing further comprises a second race (inner portion of 81) and a plurality of rolling elements (81) between the first race and the second race.
As to claim 7, Nagumo in view of Scheuer discloses a retainer (26 in Figure 11 of Scheuer) disposed around the plurality of roll rings to retain the plurality of roll rings in their relative position with respect to one another.
As to claim 9, Nagumo in view of Scheuer discloses wherein the retainer is a double piece (Figure 11 in Scheuer).
As to claim 13, Nagumo discloses a method of multiplying torque, comprising: receiving, by a first shaft (2), a first torque; and multiplying, by a gear structure (6, 3 (32)) coupled to the first shaft and a second shaft (7), the first torque to generate a second torque provided by the second shaft, wherein the multiplying comprises rotating a bearing in response to the first torque (81, [0089] or 83, [0132] via [0111] describing that input to output can be in either direction), rotating a plurality of roll rings (41, 51) about pins (40, 50) in response to rotation of the bearing, and rotating a lobe ring (3, 6) in response to rotation of the plurality of roll rings, wherein the lobe ring (i) comprises an inner circumference comprising modified hypotrochoidal lobes and the plurality of roll rings moves eccentrically with respect to the first shaft ([0109], Table 2) and the number of roll rings in the plurality of roll rings is one or more less than the number of lobes in the lobe ring ([0084] discloses in the internally toothed gear 6, internal teeth of the hypotrochoid type are formed at a predetermined pitch in which the number of the teeth is 24, which is larger by one than the number of the meshing external teeth represented by the roll rings/pins 5, 51) or (ii) comprises an outer circumference comprising modified epitrochoidal lobes and the lobe ring moves concentrically with respect to the first shaft ([0109], Table 2). However, Nagumo doesn’t disclose the plurality of roll rings moving eccentrically with respect to the pins as recited.
Scheuer discloses a torque multiplier, comprising: a first shaft (1) for providing a first torque; a second shaft (9) for providing a second torque; and a gear structure coupled to the first shaft and the second shaft to multiply the first torque to generate the second torque, the gear structure comprising: a plurality of roll rings (20); a lobe ring (7) in contact with the plurality of roll rings, the lobe ring comprising (i) an inner circumference comprising modified lobes wherein the plurality of roll rings is configured to move eccentrically with respect to the first shaft; a pin structure comprising a plurality of pins (21), each of the pins located inside one of the roll ring; and a bearing (2, 3, 4) in contact with the plurality of roll rings. Scheuer shows that it is well known in the art to provide the plurality of roll rings moving eccentrically with respect to the plurality of pins (lines 27-29).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide eccentric movement between the roll rings and pins in Nagumo in view of Scheuer to increase tangential force between the components coupled to the first and second shafts resulting in greater operating efficiency of torque multiplier.
As to claim 14, Nagumo discloses wherein the lobe ring is fixed to the second shaft to rotate the second shaft to provide the second torque ([0084], lines 9-10).
As to claim 17, Nagumo discloses wherein the bearing is eccentric (via motion of 22 and 3; [0089]).
As to claim 19, Nagumo in view of Scheuer discloses wherein the bearing further comprises a first race (4 in Scheuer) in contact with the plurality of roll rings.
As to claim 20, Nagumo in view of Scheuer discloses wherein the bearing further comprises a second race (2 in Scheuer) and a plurality of rolling elements (3 in Scheuer) between the first race and the second race.
As to claim 21, Nagumo in view of Scheuer discloses a retainer (26 in Figure 11 in Scheuer) disposed around the plurality of roll rings to retain the plurality of roll rings in their relative position with respect to one another.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagumo in view of Scheuer as applied to claims 1 and 7 above and further in view of Distin 4552037 (all previously cited). Nagumo in view of Scheuer discloses a retainer (26 in Scheuer), but doesn’t explicitly describe that it is a single piece.
Distin discloses a torque multiplier and shows that it is well known in the art to have a retainer (96, Figures 6 and 7) for holding the roll rings as a single piece.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the retainer in Nagumo in view of Scheuer into a single piece further in view of Distin which reduces the number of components needed to hold roll rings to simplify and reduce cost of assembling multiplier.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 10, 11, 12 and 16 are allowed. See reasons for allowance indicated pertaining to claims 10-12 in previous office action filed 12/10/25.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record doesn’t disclose or render obvious a motivation to provide for:
-(as to claim 6) a torque multiplier having a first and second shaft providing a first and second torque; a gear structure having a plurality of roll rings in contact with a lobe ring coupled to the first and second shafts; the lobe ring having a modified hypotrochoidal lobe inner circumference in which the roll rings move eccentrically with respect to first shaft or a modified epitrochoidal lobe outer circumference in which the lobe moves concentrically with the first shaft; a plurality of pins located inside the roll rings; a bearing having a first race in contact with the roll rings and a plurality of rolling elements between the first and second races and wherein the elements have two or more diameters and in combination with the limitations as recited in claim 6.
-(as to claim 16) a method of multiply torque by receiving a first torque by a first shaft; a gear structure multiplying the torque coupled to the first and second shaft; the multiplying having a bearing rotating in responses to the first torque; rotating a plurality of roll rings about pins in response to the bearing; rotating a lobe ring in response to rotation of the roll rings wherein the lobe ring is fixed to the second shaft to provide second torque; the lobe ring having a modified hypotrochoidal lobe inner circumference in which the roll rings move eccentrically with respect to first shaft or a modified epitrochoidal lobe outer circumference in which the lobe moves concentrically with the first shaft; wherein pins located in the roll rings is fixed to the second shaft to rotate the shaft to provide the second torque and in combination with the limitations exactly as written in claim 16.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 3 and 18 are objected to (via prior art purposes only) 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. Claims 3 and 18 as written is reasons for indicating allowability and the examiner suggest applicant amend claims 1 and 13 with the limitations recited in these claims to expedite allowance of application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-DE 102015116482 discloses a torque multiplier and shows that it is well known in the art to provide an inner and outer modified cycloidal lobe (Figure 12) in contact with plurality of roll rings (8b), each having a plurality of pins located inside (8a).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TISHA D LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7093. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30am to 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, Anna M Momper can be reached at 571-270-5788. 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.
Tdl
/TISHA D LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 March 7, 2026