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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 18, 2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include reference characters 33, 34 and 35 are not mentioned in the description. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kiener (DE 2422997, included with Office Action dated Sept. 30, 2025)).
Kiener discloses and shows a transmission comprising:
a first rotating member (2), such as a shaft, coupled to receive power from a source (not shown);
a second rotating member (10) constrained to rotate coaxially with the first rotating member;
a fixed positive displacement hydraulic mechanism such as an axial piston device (7) with portions thereof positioned on and between said first and second members such that a volume is displaced and thus hydraulic flow by relative angular motions between them;
a plurality of stationary rotary couplings (not labeled, items between 10 and 16/17) positioned on either first, second or both said rotating members in fluid communication to receive or disperse said hydraulic flow and transport said hydraulic flow to external fluid lines (16, 17); and
a variable displacement hydraulic mechanism (18) in fluid communication with said stationary rotary couplings and the external fluid lines coupled to said second rotating member.
Cl. 2 – a load (not shown) is coupled to said second member.
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 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiener as applied to claim 1.
Kiener discloses and shows the invention of claim 1 as described elsewhere above. Regarding claim 25, Kiener does not include an electric drive motor. However, the use of an electric motor or not is deemed to be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in lieu of MPEP 2114 (I) which states, “A claim containing a ‘recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus’ if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural (emphasis added) limitations of the claim”. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
MPEP 2144 clearly states that “The rationale to modify or combine the prior art does not have to be expressly stated in the prior art; the rational may be expressly or impliedly contained in the prior art or it may be reasoned from knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, established scientific principles, or legal precedent established by prior case law" (emphasis added).
MPEP 2144 also states, “If the applicant has demonstrated the criticality of a specific limitation, it would not be appropriate to rely solely on case law as the rationale to support an obviousness rejection” (emphasis added). However, Applicant’s disclosure, and all other evidence of record, fails to set forth any unexpected result (i.e., criticality) where the prime mover is an electric motor or a diesel or internal combustion engine. Accordingly, the claimed orientation lacks any criticality such that a rejection based solely on case law is appropriate.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiener as applied to claim 1 and in view of Zulu (US 5,396,768).
Kiener discloses and shows the invention of claim 1 as described elsewhere above. Regarding claim 37, Kiener does not include a third rotary coupling to provide a passage to a reservoir as claimed. Zulu discloses and shows at Fig. 1 a transmission having external fluid lines (34, 36) and a third coupling (39) operably constructed to provide a passage to a reservoir (40) to accommodate leakages (col. 5:18-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Kiener transmission to incorporate a third rotary coupling to be operably constructed to provide a passage to a reservoir from the positive displacement hydraulic mechanism to accommodate leakages as offered by Zulu.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 23, 24, 31 and 34-36 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art neither anticipates nor renders obvious a transmission as claimed to include a selectively controllable clutch operable between the second member and the variable displacement hydraulic mechanism. The aforementioned reference to Kiener discloses and shows a transmission having a selectively controllable clutch operable between the first member and the variable displacement hydraulic mechanism. Kiener does not recommend arranging the clutch between the second member and the variable displacement hydraulic mechanism as claimed and there’s no motivation to do so without improper hindsight and the use of the Applicant’s specification as a blueprint for rejection purposes.
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.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to the rejected claims have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOBBY RUSHING, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM-5PM 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) 270-7778. 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.
/BOBBY RUSHING, JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights