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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 08/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-13 and 16 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 05/08/2026.
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 1-6, 8-9, 13 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reisch (US 20190360535 A1) in view of Groschek (DE 102011085204 B4).
Regarding claim 1, Reisch discloses a transmission (see Fig. 1 and 4) comprising a gearwheel arrangement (7, 6), the gearwheel arrangement comprising: a first gearwheel (7) and a second gearwheel (6), the first and second gearwheels being coaxially arranged and selectively rotationally connectable to one another so as to be fixed for common rotation (via 26), wherein the transmission is arranged to selectively transfer torque via the first gearwheel (when 26 is engaged with 11 and 28), and wherein the transmission is further configured to selectively transfer torque via the second gearwheel only when the second gearwheel is rotationally connected to the first gearwheel and fixed for common rotation therewith (when 26 is engaged with 11 and 10). Reisch fails to disclose a set of bearings, comprising: a pair cylindrical roller bearings configured to support radial loads and a common rolling element bearing configured to support axial loads. However, Groschek teaches a set of bearings (see Fig. 3; 13, 14, 24), comprising: a pair cylindrical roller bearings (14, 24) configured to support radial loads and a common rolling element bearing (13) configured to support axial loads. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Reisch with a set of bearings, as taught by Groschek, to support the gearing both axially and radially, and to provide a four-point bearing with cylindrical roller bearings which reduces the risk of sliding movements causing premature destruction of the bearings (see attached English translation, page 4 lines 5-15). The combination above would necessarily result in the following limitations: a first pair of cylindrical roller bearings (Groschek; 14, 24) configured to support radial loads, the first pair of cylindrical roller bearings being arranged to support the first gearwheel (Reisch; 7) in a radial direction of the gearwheel arrangement, a second pair of cylindrical roller bearings (Groschek; 14, 24) configured to support the radial loads, the second pair of cylindrical roller bearings being arranged to support the second gearwheel (Reisch; 6) in the radial direction, and a common rolling element bearing (Groschek; 13) configured to support axial loads, the common rolling element bearing being arranged to support both of the first and second gearwheels in an axial direction of the gearwheel arrangement; the transmission further comprising a housing (Groschek; housing) in which the gearwheel arrangement is arranged, the set of bearings being arranged to support the first and second gearwheels directly against the housing (Groschek; Fig. 3). Note that a duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In this instance, Groschek discloses a set of bearings for a single gearwheel. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use a second set of bearings for a second gearwheel, since a second set of bearings would not produce any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 2, Reisch discloses the first gearwheel (7) comprises a first set of gear teeth (11) and the second gearwheel (6) comprises a second set of gear teeth (10), the first and second sets of gear teeth being axially offset from one another (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 3, Reisch discloses an axial side surface of the first gearwheel (left axial side surface of 7 in the figure) faces an axial side surface of the second gearwheel (right axial side surface of 6 in the figure), the axial side surfaces being arranged to transfer an axial gear mesh force between the first and second gearwheels via axial contact (via 28).
Regarding claim 4, Reisch discloses an axial fastening member (see Fig. 4; fastening member to the right of 32 and 32) arranged to prevent relative axial movement of the first and second gearwheels (see Fig. 4), wherein the axial fastening member is arranged to transfer the axial gear mesh force between the first and second gearwheels via axial contact between the axial fastening member and one of the first and second gearwheels (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 5, Reisch discloses a first gear engaging sleeve (26) arranged to selectively rotationally connect the first and second gearwheels (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the common rolling element bearing (Groschek; 13) configured to support the axial loads is a ball bearing (Groschek; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Reisch discloses a shaft (14) on which the first and second gearwheels (7, 6) are arranged (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 9, Reisch discloses the first and second gearwheels (7, 6) are rotatably arranged on the shaft (14).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the common rolling element bearing (Groschek; 13) is configured to support the axial loads in both axial directions of the gearwheel arrangement (Groschek; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, Reisch in view of Groschek discloses a vehicle (Reisch; claim 21) comprising the transmission according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Claim 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reisch (US 20190360535 A1) in view of Groschek (DE 102011085204 B4) and Yumoto (US 6877928 B2).
Regarding claim 11, Reisch in view of Groschek fail to disclose the rolling element bearing is arranged on an axial extension of the first gearwheel. However, Yumoto teaches the rolling element bearing (see Fig. 3, 426) is arranged on an axial extension (412) of the first gearwheel (402). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Reisch in view of Groschek with a bearing arranged on an axial extension of the first gearwheel, as taught by Yumoto, so that the bearing disposed on the outer periphery of the small-diameter shaft section can be free from any stress which may direct from radially inside to radially outward. With the above free-stress state, the shaft can be rotatably born in an ordinary state (see column 7 lines 30-35). As a result of the combination, the following limitations would necessarily result: the common rolling element bearing configured to support axial load (Groschek; 13) is arranged on an axial extension (Yumoto, 412) of the first gearwheel (Reisch; 7).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of claim 11 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the common rolling element bearing (Groschek; 13) configured to support the axial loads comprises at least one inner ring member (Groschek; inner ring member of 13) arranged in fixed connection with the first gearwheel (Groschek; Fig. 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections that were necessitated by an amendment.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 5:00pm 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-357-2384. 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.
/JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights