Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/567,723

BOOT ASSEMBLY OF DRIVE AXLE

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Dec 06, 2023
Examiner
BINDA, GREGORY JOHN
Art Unit
3679
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Hyundai WIA Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1456 granted / 1798 resolved
+29.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1839
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
§102
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§112
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1798 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION Drawings The drawings are objected to because at Fig. 6 reference numerals 412 and 812 are transcribed. 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because: Paragraphs 16 & 63 include undefined acronym ABS. In paragraph 49, outer race 210 is misnumbered. In paragraphs 64-66, ABS sensor 310 is misnumbered. In paragraph 94, maze forming portion 812 is misnumbered. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it begins with a phrase that can be implied and because it is not written in clear narrative form. It is instead written in the form of a claim. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 4, 8 & 10-11 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 4 recites the limitation, “the band [that assembles the bearing seal unit between the second of the boot and the driveshaft] is fastened in a structure surrounding the large-diameter section of the boot, whereby the boot is fastened to the outer ring.” No such band is disclosed or otherwise suggested in the specification. Each of claims 8 & 10-11 recites the limitation, “a housing supporting portion [410] bending toward the inclined surface is formed on an inner surface of the end of the small-diameter section of the boot [400b]” (see Figs. 4-7). However, each of claims 8 & 10-11 depends from claim 1 which recites the limitation, “a bearing seal unit assembled between a small-diameter section [400a] at a second end of the boot and a driveshaft by a band [b] and configured to prevent inflow of foreign substances while restricting rotation of the boot” which reads exclusively on an embodiment that lacks housing supporting portion 410 (see Figs, 1-2). As such there is no description of a boot assembly that includes all the limitations of claims 8 & 10-11. Claims 4, 8 & 10-11 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 enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 4 recites the limitation, “the band [that assembles the bearing seal unit between the second of the boot and the driveshaft] is fastened in a structure surrounding the large-diameter section of the boot, whereby the boot is fastened to the outer ring.” No such band is disclosed or otherwise suggested in the specification. As such, it would not be possible for one of ordinary skill in the art to make or use the claimed invention without undue experimentation. In making this determination the examiner affirms that he has considered the breadth of the claims; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the nature of the invention; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the state of the prior art; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the level of one of ordinary skill; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the level of predictability in the art; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the amount of direction provided by the inventor; any PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale existence of working examples; and the quantity of experimentation needed to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure. Each of claims 8 & 10-11 recites the limitation, “a housing supporting portion [410] bending toward the inclined surface is formed on an inner surface of the end of the small-diameter section of the boot [400b]” (see Figs. 4-7). However, each of claims 8 & 10-11 depends from claim 1 which recites the limitation, “a bearing seal unit assembled between a small-diameter section [400a] at a second end of the boot and a driveshaft by a band [b] and configured to prevent inflow of foreign substances while restricting rotation of the boot” which reads exclusively on an embodiment that lacks housing supporting portion 410 (see Figs, 1-2). As such there is no description of a boot assembly that includes all the limitations of claims 8 & 10-11. As such, it would not be possible for one of ordinary skill in the art to make or use the claimed invention without undue experimentation. In making this determination the examiner affirms that he has considered the breadth of the claims; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the nature of the invention; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the state of the prior art; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the level of one of ordinary skill; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the level of predictability in the art; PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale the amount of direction provided by the inventor; any PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale existence of working examples; and the quantity of experimentation needed to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure. 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim3 includes undefined acronym ABS. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 Claims 1, 4-6 & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krude. US 2003/0144061. At Fig. 1, Krude shows a boot assembly of a drive axle, comprising: a wheel bearing (26) assembled to a wheel housing (12); an outer ring (36) formed in a ring shape and having an outer part fixed to an outer race (31) of the wheel bearing; a boot having a large-diameter section (43) at a first end assembled to an inner part of the outer ring; and a bearing seal unit (37) assembled between a small-diameter section (41) at a second end of the boot and a driveshaft (14) by a band (42) and configured to prevent inflow of foreign substances while restricting rotation of the boot, wherein an outer surface of the inner part of the outer ring is inserted in an inner surface of the large-diameter section of the boot; and a second band (45) is fastened in a structure surrounding the large-diameter section of the boot, whereby the boot is fastened to the outer ring, wherein the bearing seal unit includes: a shaft bearing (49) assembled between the small-diameter section of the boot and the driveshaft; and a shaft seal (39) assembled between the small-diameter section of the boot and the driveshaft at a position closer to an end of the small-diameter section of the boot than the shaft bearing, wherein a bearing housing (47) is forcibly assembled on an inner surface of the small-diameter section of the boot in a shape surrounding the shaft bearing and the shaft seal; and a boundary step is formed on an inner surface of the bearing housing at a boundary to the shaft bearing facing the shaft seal. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 7 & 12-17 are 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. Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Huff, Naka and Jeong each disclose a boot assembly. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Greg Binda whose telephone number is (571)272-7077. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 et. 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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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. /Greg Binda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 06, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Mar 16, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601379
CONSTANT VELOCITY JOINT AND DRIVESHAFT INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12577977
INTEGRATED COMPOSITE DRIVE SHAFTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571431
FLEXIBLE METALLIC COUPLINGS FOR DRIVE SHAFTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571432
UNIVERSAL JOINT ASSEMBLY FOR SURGICAL TOOLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560205
CONSTANT VELOCITY JOINT AND DRIVESHAFT INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+11.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1798 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month