Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 18/596,423

Drive Unit

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Mar 05, 2024
Priority
Mar 23, 2023 — JP 2023-046706
Examiner
NEJAD, MAHDI H
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Exedy Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
466 granted / 631 resolved
+3.9% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
661
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
44.1%
+4.1% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 631 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on Japanese Application JP2023-046706 dated 03/23/2023 and applicant has filed a certified copy of this Japanese application on 05/24/2024. Response to Amendment Claims 1-6 were previously pending. New claims 7-8 are added. 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)(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, 4-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Shibata (US 20230174130 A1). Regarding claim 1, Shibata teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a drive unit configured to make a mobile object travel in a towing direction in which the mobile object is towed and a pushing direction in which the mobile object is pushed, the drive unit comprising: an electric motor (battery operated motor 106); an operating part (operating part comprises operation panel 42 and operation unit 38) configured to be operated in the towing direction and the pushing direction (by forward/reverse shifter switch 42b of the operating part), the operating part located on a distal end in the towing direction; and a control part (controller 12b) configured to control the electric motor (par. 43: “The controller 12b (see FIG. 2) is configured to control operations of a motor 106”) such that the mobile object travels in the towing direction when it has been determined that the operating part has been operated in the towing direction, the control part configured to control the electric motor such that the mobile object travels in the pushing direction when it has been determined that the operating part has been operated in the pushing direction (by forward/reverse shifter switch 42b connected to the motor 106 via controller 12b). PNG media_image1.png 836 812 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Shibata teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) a support part; an operating mast extending upward from the support part; and a handle part disposed on an upper end of the operating mast, wherein the operating part is attached to the handle part. Regarding claim 4, Shibata teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the operating part (operating part comprises operation panel 42 and operation unit 38) includes an operating lever (operation lever 52 of operation unit 38), the operating lever extending from the handle part (52 extends upward from the handle part), the operating lever located on the distal end in the towing direction. Regarding claim 5, (Under a first interpretation for the base portion), Shibata teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the operating part (operating part comprises operation panel 42 and operation unit 38) includes a base portion attached to the outer surface of handle part, an operating lever (operation lever 52 of operation unit 38) extending from the base portion, the operating lever configured to be unitarily operated with the base portion, and a contact portion (retainers 56, 58) configured to be unitarily operated with the base portion, the contact portion located on the distal end in the towing direction. Regarding claim 6, Shibata teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) a pallet truck (handcart 2) comprising: a loading platform (bucket 300); and the drive unit recited in claim 2, wherein the support part is attached to the loading platform. Regarding claim 8, (Under a second interpretation for the base portion), Shibata teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) the operating part includes a base portion, and an operating lever extending from the base portion, the operating lever configured to be unitarily operated with the base portion, the operating lever is unitarily pivoted with the base portion. PNG media_image2.png 757 752 media_image2.png Greyscale 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 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Lear (US 20040213656 A1). Regarding claim 1, Lear teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a drive unit configured to make a mobile object travel in a towing direction in which the mobile object is towed and a pushing direction in which the mobile object is pushed, the drive unit comprising: an electric motor (par. 21: “The forward wheels 14 are powered by drive means in the form of two motors (not shown) located within the housing 18 between the drive wheels 14”); an operating part (38) configured to be operated in the towing direction and the pushing direction, the operating part located on a distal end in the towing direction; and a control part (control panel 36 inside the housing) configured to control the electric motor such that the mobile object travels in the towing direction when it has been determined that the operating part has been operated in the towing direction, the control part configured to control the electric motor such that the mobile object travels in the pushing direction when it has been determined that the operating part has been operated in the pushing direction (par. 26: “The control unit is operatively connected to both the motors and the actuator 24. The control unit 36 allows for variable speed control for forward and backward movement of the device 10. Forward and backward movement is instigated through lever 38 and a brake 40 allows the operator to stop the device quickly in an emergency”). PNG media_image3.png 833 602 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Lear teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) a support part (28); an operating mast (34) extending upward from the support part; and a handle part disposed on an upper end of the operating mast, wherein the operating part is attached to the handle part (both directly attached to the housing). Regarding claim 3, Lear teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) an emergency stop switch (40) disposed on the handle part, wherein the control part is configured to stop the electric motor when the emergency stop switch has been operated by a user (par. 26: “Forward and backward movement is instigated through lever 38 and a brake 40 allows the operator to stop the device quickly in an emergency”). Regarding claim 4, Lear teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the operating part includes an operating lever (lever of forward/backward mechanism 38), the operating lever extending from the handle part, the operating lever located on the distal end in the towing direction. Regarding claim 6, Lear teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) a pallet truck (lifting and transporting device) comprising: a loading platform (12); and the drive unit recited in claim 2, wherein the support part is attached to the loading platform (par. 24: “Behind the actuator 24 is the rearward portion of the frame 12 in the form of a rearward extension of the plates 22 that form a platform 28. The platform 28 extends the full width of the frame 12 and includes side-walls 30 that serve to locate and position a pair of batteries 32 thereon”). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 7 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments on the grounds that “Shibata and Lear do not disclose the operating part located on a distal end in the towing direction” are fully considered, but not found persuasive. Because as clearly shown in annotated Figs. of Shibata and Lear above, each of the operating parts is located at distal end in towing direction. See definition of distal: PNG media_image4.png 604 1036 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 260 524 media_image5.png Greyscale Applicant’s arguments on the grounds that “Shibata and Lear are not configured such that the operating part first comes into contact with the user when the mobile object approaches the user in the towing direction” are fully considered, but not found persuasive. Because this is not claimed. Applicant’s arguments regarding the claimed same direction of the operating part and traveling of the mobile device: Device of Shibata is equipped with forward/reverse shifter switch 42b as stated above and described in par. 0046. Also see forward/reverse button in the manual and Facebook and YouTube videos of Makita Battery Powered Wheelbarrow attached to this paper and shown below. PNG media_image6.png 774 502 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 866 1250 media_image7.png Greyscale PNG media_image8.png 1016 1380 media_image8.png Greyscale PNG media_image9.png 1100 1376 media_image9.png Greyscale Device of Lear is also equipped with forward and backward lever 38. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MAHDI H NEJAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-4pm 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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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. MAHDI H. NEJAD Examiner Art Unit 3723 /MAHDI H NEJAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 05, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Apr 28, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 17, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703112
ROBOT HAND
4y 0m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12698188
LOAD-SENSING VEHICLE LIFT
4y 0m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12691359
EDGE SHARPENING TOOL FOR ACRYLIC WAX SCRAPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692138
PNEUMATIC DISMANTLING DEVICE
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692139
HYDRAULIC JACK ASSEMBLIES
2y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+29.1%)
2y 10m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 631 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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