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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-9 are currently pending herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the drawings contain numerous issues and inconsistencies. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance. For example, the drawings should be similar to that of the applied art below:
Figure 4.2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following elements in the claims must all be shown and labeled or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered:
Claim 1: A three wheel vehicle comprising: two front wheels which allow primary directional control of the vehicle; a single rear wheel; a passenger compartment, the compartment comprising one or more passenger seats; a motor or a plurality of electric motors located in a mid or rear section of the vehicle, driving the front wheels either directly or indirectly, providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or a rearward torque for deceleration of the wheels; an additional electric motor located in a rear section of the vehicle, driving the rear wheel either directly or indirectly, providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or rearward torque for deceleration of the wheel.
Claim 2: The vehicle of claim 1 wherein front wheel and rear wheel drive systems are mechanically independent; the front motor(s) are not driving the rear wheel, and the rear motor is not driving the front wheels.
Claim 3: The vehicle of claim 1 wherein the rear motor is not mechanically connected to the front motor(s) or wheel(s), and the front motor(s) are not mechanically connected to the rear motor or wheel.
Claim 6: The vehicle of claim 5 wherein the maximum rear wheel torque is controlled by one or more of: limiting power of the rear motor; electrically controlling power of the rear motor in either a static or dynamic manner; braking the rear wheel to reduce effective wheel torque.
Claim 9: The vehicle of claim 1 wherein the front wheels are located such that the vertical plane between the front or rear of the front wheels intersects with the passenger compartment.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the front wheels” (line 5) should be rewritten as “the two front wheels”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein front wheel and rear wheel drive systems are mechanically independent” (line 5) should be rewritten as “wherein a front wheel drive system and a rear wheel drive system are mechanically independent”
Claim 5 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities: “50%” should be rewritten as “50 percent”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-9 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.
Claim 1: driving the front wheels either directly or indirectly, providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or a rearward torque for deceleration of the wheels; an additional electric motor located in a rear section of the vehicle, driving the rear wheel either directly or indirectly, providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or rearward torque for deceleration of the wheel.
Claim 4: wherein torque produced by the rear motor provides for one or more of: acceleration of the vehicle, deceleration of the vehicle, maintaining velocity of the vehicle, power generation or regeneration for the vehicle.
Claim 5: wherein the maximum rear wheel torque is limited to no more than 50% of the total maximum torque produced by all wheels.
Claim 6: wherein the maximum rear wheel torque is controlled by one or more of: limiting power of the rear motor; electrically controlling power of the rear motor in either a static or dynamic manner; braking the rear wheel to reduce effective wheel torque.
Claim 7: The vehicle of claim 1 wherein at least 50% of the total maximum power of all the motors is produced by the front motor(s).
Claim 8: The vehicle of claim 1 wherein the maximum rear motor power is less than or equal to a total sum of the front motor(s) maximum power.
The specification did not adequately disclose the basis for these limitations, thus there is insufficient reduction to practice. The specification fails to describe how these control methods are carried out. No flow control diagrams are provided in the figures as originally filed. No description of the control steps is provided. The Applicant should take note that it is not enough to simply outline a concept, the manner in which the invention is embodied must be disclosed in exchange for the patent protection sought. The drawings and specification are not sufficiently enabling as to understand the structure and the function of these limitations such that a meaningful search could be made.
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 1-9 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 includes the limitations "a motor or a plurality of electric motors located in a mid or rear section of the vehicle, driving the front wheels either directly or indirectly, providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or a rearward torque for deceleration of the wheels…”, which is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Specifically, regarding claim 1, the claim recites unclear optional claiming throughout and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1-9 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 includes the limitations "a motor or a plurality of electric motors located in a mid or rear section of the vehicle, driving the front wheels either directly or indirectly, providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or a rearward torque for deceleration of the wheels; an additional electric motor located in a rear section of the vehicle”, which is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear as to whether the one electric motor located in the rear section is a different motor than the motor located in a mid-section. To overcome the rejection, Applicant should consider changing the recitations to: “at least one first motor is located in a mid-section of the vehicle…and a second motor is located in the rear section”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1-9 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 includes limitations "the wheels (line 7) and “the wheel” (line 10) which is of unclear antecedent basis and therefore renders the claims indefinite. The limitations should most likely be rewritten as: “the two front wheels” and “the rear wheel”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 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. Claim 2 includes limitations "the front motor(s) and “the rear motor” which is of unclear antecedent basis and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 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. Claim 3 includes limitations "are not mechanically connected” which is unclear and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1-9 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claims 4 and 6 include the limitations "one or more of, which is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Specifically, regarding claim 4/6, the claim recites unclear optional claiming and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 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. Claim 5 includes limitations "all wheels” which is of unclear antecedent basis and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 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. Claim 7 includes limitations "all the motors” which is of unclear antecedent basis and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buschbom et al. (US 4,373,600).
[Claim 1] Regarding Claim 1, Buschbom discloses: A three wheel vehicle (See, e.g., Fig.1-11, 10) comprising: two front wheels (See, e.g., Fig.1-11, 12+13) which allow primary directional control of the vehicle (See, e.g., Fig.1-11);
a single rear wheel (See, e.g., Fig.1-11, 14);
a passenger compartment (See, e.g., Fig.1-11, 20), the compartment comprising one or more passenger seats (See, e.g., Fig.1-11, 20);
a motor (See, e.g., Fig.1-11, 26+27+53) or a plurality of electric motors located in a mid or rear section of the vehicle (See, e.g., Fig.1-11), driving the front wheels either directly or indirectly (See, e.g., Fig.1-11), providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or a rearward torque for deceleration of the wheels (See, e.g., Fig.1-11);
an additional electric motor (See, e.g., Fig.1-11, 73) located in a rear section of the vehicle (See, e.g., Fig.1-11), driving the rear wheel either directly or indirectly (See, e.g., Fig.1-11), providing either or both a forward torque for acceleration or rearward torque for deceleration of the wheel (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 2] Regarding Claim 2, Buschbom discloses: wherein front wheel and rear wheel drive systems are mechanically independent (See, e.g., Fig.1-11); the front motor(s) are not driving the rear wheel, and the rear motor is not driving the front wheels (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 3] Regarding Claim 3, Buschbom discloses: wherein the rear motor is not mechanically connected to the front motor(s) or wheel(s) (See, e.g., Fig.1-11), and the front motor(s) are not mechanically connected to the rear motor or wheel (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 4] Regarding Claim 4, Buschbom discloses: wherein torque produced by the rear motor provides for one or more of: acceleration of the vehicle, deceleration of the vehicle, maintaining velocity of the vehicle, power generation or regeneration for the vehicle (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 5] Regarding Claim 5, Buschbom discloses: wherein the maximum rear wheel torque is limited to no more than 50% of the total maximum torque produced by all wheels (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 6] Regarding Claim 6, Buschbom discloses: wherein the maximum rear wheel torque is controlled by one or more of: limiting power of the rear motor; electrically controlling power of the rear motor in either a static or dynamic manner; braking the rear wheel to reduce effective wheel torque (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 7] Regarding Claim 7, Buschbom discloses: wherein at least 50% of the total maximum power of all the motors is produced by the front motor(s) (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 8] Regarding Claim 8, Buschbom discloses: wherein the maximum rear motor power is less than or equal to a total sum of the front motor(s) maximum power (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
[Claim 9] Regarding Claim 9, Buschbom discloses: wherein the front wheels are located such that the vertical plane between the front or rear of the front wheels intersects with the passenger compartment (See, e.g., Fig.1-11).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and can be found on the attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M DOLAK whose telephone number is (571)270-7757. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-530 EST Monday-Friday.
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, J ALLEN SHRIVER can be reached on 303-297-4337. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES M DOLAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613