DETAILED ACTION
Status of Submission
The claim amendments and the amended abstract filed on June 26, 2026 have been entered.
The substitute specification filed on June 26, 2026 has not been entered because:
It introduces new matter into the disclosure. There is no support in the original disclosure for a “rechargeable” battery, as recited in ¶ 0030.
It is replete with errors and inaccuracies. Many of the objections to the specification have not been properly addressed. For example:
The summary of the invention (¶¶ 0006-0007) inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, a single coupling device, and a single steering device.
The summary of the invention (¶¶ 0006-0007) inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a “steering device”. According to ¶¶ 0024-0025, the preferred embodiment comprises means for controlling the speed of the wheels. Such a steering control via control of the wheels (i.e., steering by differential driving of the wheels) does not constitute a “steering device”. Rather, it constitutes a steering control system that utilizes the drive motors (not a distinct “steering device”) to produce turning/steering.
¶ 0006 recites a pair of wheels, but ¶ 0007 inaccurately refers to a single wheel by using the term “the wheel”.
In ¶ 0011, “includes a first” (2nd line) should read “include a first”.
¶ 0014 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, and a single coupling device.
¶ 0018 inaccurately refers to a single drive unit using the term “The drive unit”.
¶¶ 0018, 0022-0025 and 0028-0029 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a “steering device”.
¶¶ 0026 and 0033 inaccurately refer to a single drive unit using the term “the drive unit”.
¶ 0026 inaccurately refers to a single coupling device using the term “the coupling device”.
In ¶ 0033, “the coupling device 4” (4th line) should read “the front coupling device 4F”.
In ¶ 0035, “the drive unit 3” (5th line) should read “the front-wheel unit 3A”.
¶ 0036 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a “steering device”.
In ¶ 0036, “the drive unit 3” (6th line) should read “the front-wheel unit 3A”.
¶¶ 0037-0038 inaccurately refer to a single coupling device using the term “the coupling device”.
¶ 0037 inaccurately refers to a single drive unit using the term “the drive unit”.
¶ 0038 inaccurately refers to a single drive unit using the term “The drive unit”.
In ¶ 0038, “the attachment section 41 via the” (6th line) should read “one of the attachment sections 41 via the respective”.
¶ 0040 inaccurately refers to a single coupling device using the terms “The coupling device” and “the coupling device”.
¶ 0040 inaccurately refers to a single drive unit using the term “the drive unit”.
¶ 0041 inaccurately refers to a single adjustment mechanism using the term “the adjustment mechanism”.
¶ 0042 inaccurately refers to a single drive unit using the terms “The drive unit” and “the drive unit”.
¶¶ 0043-0044 inaccurately refer to a single drive unit using the term “The drive unit”.
¶¶ 0053 and 0059-0060 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a “steering device”.
¶ 0059 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, and a single coupling device.
¶¶ 0060, 0062 and 0064-0066 inaccurately refer to a single drive unit using the term “The drive unit”.
¶¶ 0060-0064 inaccurately refer to a single adjustment mechanism using the term “the adjustment mechanism”.
¶¶ 0060 and 0066 inaccurately refer to a single wheel by using the term “the wheel”.
¶ 0061 defines γ as “a preset value equal to or more than θ” whereas elsewhere the specification discloses that (i) θ° is slightly larger than 90°, and (ii) γ° is 90° or a multiple of 90°.
In ¶ 0067, “the front-wheel unit” (6th to 7th lines) should read “the rear-wheel unit”.
The proposed replacement drawing sheets filed on June 26, 2026 have been disapproved by the examiner and have not been entered because replacement Fig. 3 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q). Lead lines are those lines between the reference characters and the details referred to. They must originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated. However, in replacement Fig. 3, the lead line for reference numbers 34, 34F and 34R does not extend to the “steering device” (or front and rear steering devices) described in the specification. Rather, no “steering device” is shown in the figures. Instead, the lead line for reference numbers 34, 34F and 34R extends to the black box representing the control device 52. A single black box cannot be used to illustrate both a “steering device” and the control device 52.
Claims Subject to Examination
Claims 1-7 of this application are subject to examination.
Claim Construction in Examination
During examination, the pending claims are normally interpreted according to the broadest reasonable interpretation standard (hereinafter, the “BRI standard”). That is, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP 2111 et seq.
An exception to the BRI standard occurs when the applicant acts as their own lexicographer. For this exception to apply, the applicant must clearly set forth a special definition of a claim term in the specification that differs from the plain and ordinary meaning it would otherwise possess. See MPEP 2111.01, subsection IV.
Another exception or special case occurs when a claim recites a means-plus-function limitation that must be interpreted in accordance with 35 USC 112 ¶ 6, or 35 USC 112(f). See MPEP 2181. According to the guidance provided by Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc), 35 USC 112 ¶ 6 applies when the claim term fails to recite (i) sufficiently definite structure, and/or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function.
Examiner’s Claim Construction
The following claim limitations are construed by the examiner to aid in examination:
Claim Limitation:
coupling device coupling the vehicle body with the drive unit (claim 1)
Examiner’s Construction:
a plate attached to the vehicle body by four bolts extending through four holes in the plate, with the four holes arranged at vertices of a square centered on a steering axis, and with some unknown coupling structure defining the steering axis about which the drive unit is able to turn, and art-recognized equivalents to such a coupling device
Examiner’s Explanation:
The term “device” is a generic placeholder for structure and is modified by functional language defining the function it performs. The claim does not recite sufficiently definite structure. Further, while some structure is required by claim 1 (see ll. 15-19), the claim fails to recite sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. In particular, the claim fails to recite the required coupling structure that defines the disclosed steering axis and that enables the drive unit to turn around the steering axis (claim 1, ll. 9-10). Thus, the claim limitation invokes 35 USC 112(f).
The corresponding structure is identified in the specification as the coupling device 4. However, the specification fails to explain the complete structure of the coupling device 4. Specifically, the specification fails to identify the required coupling structure that defines the disclosed steering axis Xs and that enables the drive unit 3 to turn around the steering axis Xs (claim 1, ll. 9-10). The specification does identify some of the corresponding structure as:
A plate-shaped attachment section 41 described as being obtained by combining a trapezoidal shape and a rectangular shape (shown in Figs. 6 and 7 as a plate having the shape of an irregular hexagon).
The drive unit 3 attached to the plate 41 via a support 33 in a manner that is not explained in the specification—other than a broad disclosure that the wheels 31 rotate around the steering (rotation) axis Xs. The required coupling structure that defines the steering axis Xs and that enables the drive unit 3 to turn around the steering axis Xs is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description and enablement requirements of 35 USC 112(a).
An adjustment mechanism that can change the reference direction R by a unit of 90° relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle main body 2 by changing an attachment orientation of the plate 41 relative to the vehicle main body 21, with the adjustment mechanism defined by bolts 42A that pass through respective through holes 42B in the plate 41 and engage respective threaded engagement holes in the vehicle main body 21, with the through holes 42B being four in number and arranged at vertices of a square centered on the steering axis Xs.
An alternative adjustment mechanism that can change the reference direction R relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle body 2 automatically during the traveling of the transport vehicle 1, which alternative adjustment mechanism includes an adjustment motor (not shown) and a gear transmission mechanism (not shown) or a link transmission mechanism (not shown). This alternative adjustment mechanism is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description and enablement requirements of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim Limitation:
adjustment mechanism allowing the reference direction to be changed around the steering axis relative to a front-rear direction of the vehicle body by changing an attachment orientation of the attachment section relative to the vehicle body (claim 1)
Examiner’s Construction:
either:
(i) four bolts extending through four holes in the plate of the coupling device, with the four holes arranged at vertices of a square centered on a steering axis, and with the bolts engaging respective threaded holes in the vehicle body, , and art-recognized equivalents to such an adjustment mechanism, or
(ii) an adjustment motor having unknown structure coupled in an unknown way to a gear transmission mechanism or link transmission mechanism having unknown structure, and further being structured in some unknown way so as to be capable of changing the reference direction relative to a front-rear direction of the vehicle body automatically during traveling of the vehicle, and art-recognized equivalents to such an adjustment mechanism
Examiner’s Explanation:
The term “mechanism” is a generic placeholder for structure and is modified by functional language defining the function it performs. The claim does not recite (i) sufficiently definite structure, or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Thus, the claim limitation invokes 35 USC 112(f).
The corresponding structure is identified in the specification as one of:
An adjustment mechanism that can change the reference direction R by a unit of 90° relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle main body 2 by changing an attachment orientation of the plate 41 relative to the vehicle main body 21, with the adjustment mechanism defined by bolts 42A that pass through respective through holes 42B in the plate 41 and engage respective threaded engagement holes in the vehicle main body 21, with the through holes 42B being four in number and arranged at vertices of a square centered on the steering axis Xs.
An alternative adjustment mechanism that can change the reference direction R relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle body 2 automatically during the traveling of the transport vehicle 1, which alternative adjustment mechanism includes an adjustment motor (not shown) and a gear transmission mechanism (not shown) or a link transmission mechanism (not shown). This alternative adjustment mechanism is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description and enablement requirements of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim Limitation:
travel drive sources configured to drive the pair of wheels in such a manner as to rotate the pair of wheels (claim 1)
Examiner’s Construction:
electric motors, and art-recognized equivalents thereof
Examiner’s Explanation:
The term “sources” is a generic placeholder for structure and is modified by functional language defining the function it performs. The claim does not recite (i) sufficiently definite structure, or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Thus, the claim limitation invokes 35 USC 112(f).
The corresponding structure identified in the specification is electric motors.
Claim Limitation:
steering device configured to turn the pair of wheels around a steering axis that extends along an up-down direction (claim 1)
Examiner’s Construction:
either:
(i) an unknown type of motor coupled to the drive unit via an unknown type of gear transmission mechanism or link transmission mechanism, and art-recognized equivalents to such a steering device, or
(ii) an unknown type of rotation speed control possessing unknown structure for performing rotation speed control of the wheels of the drive unit, and art-recognized equivalents to such a steering device
Examiner’s Explanation:
The term “device” is a generic placeholder for structure and is modified by functional language defining the function it performs. The claim does not recite (i) sufficiently definite structure, or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Thus, the claim limitation invokes 35 USC 112(f).
The corresponding structure identified in the specification is a device that collectively turns the pair of wheels 31 of the drive unit 3 around the steering axis Xs, which device is one of:
A “tangible means” such as a power transmission mechanism including a steering motor (not shown) and a gear transmission mechanism (not shown) or a link transmission mechanism (not shown). The specification fails to explain the type of steering motor utilized, the specific structural components of the gear transmission mechanism or the link transmission mechanism, the specific manner in which the steering motor is coupled to and transmits motion through the gear transmission mechanism or the link transmission mechanism, or the specific manner in which the gear transmission mechanism or the link transmission mechanism is coupled to and transmits motion to the drive unit 3. Thus, the “tangible” steering device is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description and enablement requirements of 35 USC 112(a).
An “intangible means” constituted by a rotation speed control on the pair of wheels 31 of the drive unit 3, which rotation speed control is performed in collaboration of the control device 52 and the electric travel motor 32. The specification fails to explain either the specific structural components of the “rotation speed control”, or the specific manner in which such “rotation speed control” is performed. Thus, the “intangible” steering device is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description and enablement requirements of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim Limitation:
power supply device (claim 4)
Examiner’s Construction:
a battery, and art-recognized equivalents thereof
Examiner’s Explanation:
The term “device” is a generic placeholder for structure and is modified by functional language defining the function it performs. The claim does not recite (i) sufficiently definite structure, or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Thus, the claim limitation invokes 35 USC 112(f).
The corresponding structure identified in the specification is a battery.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation 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.
GROUND 1: Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The written description requirement serves both to satisfy applicant’s obligation to disclose the technologic knowledge upon which the patent is based, and to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed. It is not enough that a skilled artisan could theoretically construct his/her own version of the claimed invention. Rather, applicant bears the burden of setting forth sufficient information to show that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. Thus, the written description requirement requires applicant to go beyond a discussion of mere concepts and suggestions. It is not sufficient to merely outline desired results that the claimed invention is expected to achieve. Rather, the specification must explain how the invention is structured and how it functions in order to achieve the desired results. While subject matter that is conventional or well known in the art need not be described in detail, the specification must provide a complete description of each of the essential features recited in the claims which cause the claimed invention to achieve the desired results.
Claim 1 recites “a coupling device coupling the vehicle body with the drive unit” (l. 4). As explained in the Examiner’s Claim Construction above:
The required coupling structure that defines the steering axis Xs and that enables the drive unit 3 to turn around the steering axis Xs (claim 1, ll. 9-10) is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
The alternative adjustment mechanism (that can change the reference direction R relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle body 2 automatically during the traveling of the transport vehicle 1) is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim 1 recites “a steering device configured to turn the pair of wheels around a steering axis that extends along an up-down direction (ll. 9-10). As explained in the Examiner’s Claim Construction above:
The “tangible” steering device is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
The “intangible” steering device is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim 1 recites “an adjustment mechanism allowing the reference direction to be changed around the steering axis relative to a front-rear direction of the vehicle body by changing an attachment orientation of the attachment section relative to the vehicle body” (ll. 17-19). Further, claim 2 recites “the adjustment mechanism allows the reference direction to be changed by γ°, γ being equal to or more than θ, relative to the front-rear direction of the vehicle body.” As explained in the Examiner’s Claim Construction above, the alternative adjustment mechanism (that can change the reference direction R relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle body 2 automatically during the traveling of the transport vehicle 1) is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the written description requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim 6 recites “which transport vehicle travels along a predetermined travel path, wherein the travel path is a circulating path at least a portion of which is an arcuate section, and wherein the transport vehicle is configured to travel on the circulating path with the vehicle body maintaining an orientation.” The specification broadly states that the transport vehicle 1 travels on the travel (circulating) path 9 with the orientation of the vehicle body 2 being maintained. However, the specification fails to disclose any structure that functions to maintain an orientation of the vehicle body as the vehicle travels along the travel path. Further, no control procedure is disclosed explaining how the orientation of the vehicle body maintains an orientation during travel. Absent a complete description of essential features, the disclosure fails to set forth sufficient information to show that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 7 recites “the travel path is defined by a guidance member set on a travel surface on which the transport vehicle travels, and the transport vehicle is guided by the guidance member to travel.” The specification broadly states that the transport vehicle 1 travels on the travel (circulating) path 9, and that the travel path 9 is defined by a guidance member 96 such as (i) rails defining a physical path, or (ii) a magnetic marker, a light reflection tape, an electromagnetic induction cable, or a two-dimensional marker defining a virtual path. However, the specification fails to provide any explanation of the structure that functions to guide the transport vehicle by/via the guidance member. While general reference is made to a control device 52, the structure of that device is not disclosed. Further, no control procedure is disclosed explaining how the vehicle is guided by the guidance member. Absent a complete description of essential features, the disclosure fails to set forth sufficient information to show that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention.
Dependent claims are included in the rejection at least because of their dependencies.
GROUND 2: Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) because the specification does not reasonably provide enablement for the entire scope of the claimed invention. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
The Federal Circuit has repeatedly held that “the specification must teach those skilled in the art how to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without ‘undue experimentation’.” Nevertheless, not everything necessary to practice the invention need be disclosed; all that is necessary is that one skilled in the art be able to practice the claimed invention, given the level of knowledge and skill in the art. With respect to the breadth of a claim, the relevant concern is whether the scope of enablement provided to one skilled in the art by the disclosure is commensurate with the scope of protection sought by the claims. See MPEP 2164.08.
Claim 1 recites a generic “coupling device coupling the vehicle body with the drive unit” (l. 4). As such, the scope of this claim encompasses any and all possible structures or mechanisms capable of performing the claimed coupling function. As explained in the Examiner’s Claim Construction above:
The required coupling structure that defines the steering axis Xs and that enables the drive unit 3 to turn around the steering axis Xs (claim 1, ll. 9-10) is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the enablement requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
The alternative adjustment mechanism (that can change the reference direction R relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle body 2 automatically during the traveling of the transport vehicle 1) is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the enablement requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim 1 recites a generic “steering device configured to turn the pair of wheels around a steering axis that extends along an up-down direction (ll. 9-10). As such, the scope of this claim encompasses any and all possible structures or mechanisms capable of performing the claimed steering function. As explained in the Examiner’s Claim Construction above:
The “tangible” steering device is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the enablement requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
The “intangible” steering device is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the enablement requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim 1 recites a generic “adjustment mechanism allowing the reference direction to be changed around the steering axis relative to a front-rear direction of the vehicle body by changing an attachment orientation of the attachment section relative to the vehicle body” (ll. 17-19). As such, the scope of this claim encompasses any and all possible structures or mechanisms capable of performing the claimed adjustment function. Further, claim 2 recites “the adjustment mechanism allows the reference direction to be changed within γ° (herein, γ is a preset value equal to or more than θ) relative to the front-rear direction of the vehicle body.” As explained in the Examiner’s Claim Construction above, the alternative adjustment mechanism (that can change the reference direction R relative to the front-rear direction L of the vehicle body 2 automatically during the traveling of the transport vehicle 1) is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the enablement requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
Claim 6 generically recites “which transport vehicle travels along a predetermined travel path, wherein the travel path is a circulating path at least a portion of which is an arcuate section, and wherein the transport vehicle is configured to travel on the circulating path with the vehicle body maintaining an orientation.” Further, claim 7 generically recites “the travel path is defined by a guidance member set on a travel surface on which the transport vehicle travels, and the transport vehicle is guided by the guidance member to travel.” As such, the scope of these claims encompasses any and all possible structures, mechanisms or systems capable of guiding a transport vehicle along a predetermined travel path. While the specification makes general reference to a control device 52, the structure of that device is not disclosed. Further, no control procedure is disclosed explaining how the vehicle is guided by the guidance member. Thus, the subject matter of claims 6 and 7 is not described in the specification in a manner that complies with the enablement requirement of 35 USC 112(a).
Dependent claims are included in the rejection at least because of their dependencies.
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.
GROUND 3: Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
As explained more fully in the Examiner’s Claim Construction above, claim 1 recites limitations that invoke 112(f), but the specification fails to disclose adequate corresponding structure for performing the claimed functions. Thus, claim 1 is indefinite because the corresponding structure cannot be identified from the disclosure. Claim 2 is indefinite for the same reason.
As explained more fully in the GROUND 1 above, the specification fails to explain how the embodiments encompassed by claims 1, 6 and 7 are structured and/or how they function to achieve the desired results. Absent such supporting disclosure, the scope of claims 1, 6 and 7 cannot be ascertained with a reasonable degree of certainty, i.e., it is unclear what subject matter is encompassed by the claims, and what is excluded therefrom.
Claim 1 is inaccurate and incomplete because it defines the invention as comprising a single drive unit, a single coupling device, and a single steering device. There is no disclosed embodiment having a single drive unit, a single coupling device, and a single steering device that are capable of defining the claimed transport vehicle. Thus, the claim is incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements.
Claim 1 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a “steering device”. According to ¶¶ 0024-0025, the preferred embodiment comprises “intangible means” in the form of a “rotation speed control on the wheels”. Such a steering control via control of the wheels (i.e., steering by differential driving of the wheels) does not constitute a “steering device”. Rather, it constitutes a steering control system that utilizes the drive motors (not a distinct “steering device”) to produce turning/steering.
Claim 2 recites “the adjustment mechanism allows the reference direction to be changed within γ°, γ being equal to or more than θ, relative to the front-rear direction of the vehicle body.” This recitation is indefinite because it defines γ as “equal to or more than θ” whereas the specification discloses that (i) θ° is slightly larger than 90°, and (ii) γ° is 90° or a multiple of 90°. Thus, the claim does not define the invention in a manner consistent with the specification.
Claim 3 recites “the adjustment mechanism allows the reference direction to be changed by γ°, γ being a multiple of 90 equal to or more than 90, and θ being equal to or more than 90 but less than 180, relative to the front-rear direction of the vehicle body.” The recitation is indefinite because the recitation “a multiple of 90 equal to or more than 90” is indefinite because “a multiple of 90” is a narrower limitation whereas “equal to or more than 90” is a broader limitation than the earlier-recited narrower limitation. A broad limitation together with a narrow limitation that falls within the broad limitation (in the same claim) renders the claim indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In claim 4, the recitation “as the pair of wheels is turned by the steering device” (ll. 10-11) is indefinite for the same reasons given above with respect to the “steering device” recited in claim 1.
In claim 5, the term “the transport” (l. 4) lacks proper antecedent basis. The examiner suggests that this be changed to “the transport vehicle”.
In claim 5, the term “the pair of wheels of the rear-wheel unit” (l. 9) lacks proper antecedent basis. The rear-wheel unit has not been previously defined as having a pair of wheels.
Dependent claims are included in the rejection at least because of their dependencies.
AIA – First to File
The present reissue application contains claims to a claimed invention having an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013. Accordingly, this application is being examined under the AIA first to file provisions.
Listing of Prior Art
The following is a listing of the prior art cited in this Office action together with the shorthand reference for each document (listed alphabetically):
“Baba”
JP Publication No. 2005-297809 A (with translation)
“Bai et al.”
CN Publication No. 111976465 A (with translation)
“Chai”
CN Publication No. 111361429 A (with translation)
“Wada”
US Patent No. 5,924,512
“Wang et al.”
CN Publication No. 109968311 A (with translation)
“Wright”
US Publication No. 2019/0308856 A1
“Yan et al.”
CN Publication No. 106379409 A (with translation)
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art listed above is considered pertinent to the claimed invention but is not relied upon to reject any claim.
Baba teaches a drive unit (with drive wheels 2) that is pivoted to a vehicle body 1 about a vertical axis 7, with the drive wheels 2 being driven differentially to turn/steer the vehicle body 1, and with a motor 6 being used to adjust/change a predetermined reference direction of the drive unit with respect to the vehicle body 1.
Bai et al. teaches a drive unit 20 (with drive wheels 211) that is pivoted to a vehicle body (not shown) about a vertical axis O1 via a coupling device 10, with the drive wheels 211 being driven differentially to turn/steer the vehicle body while a locking mechanism 30 locks the drive unit 20 to the coupling device 10, and with the drive wheels 211 being driven differentially to adjust/change a predetermined reference direction of the drive unit 20 with respect to the vehicle body while the locking mechanism 30 unlocks the drive unit 20 such that it can rotate with respect to the coupling device 10.
Chai teaches a drive unit (with a drive housing 11, a drive wheel 1, and a driven wheel 2) that is pivoted to a vehicle body (not shown) about a vertical axis via a coupling device 17, 18, with the drive wheel 1 being driven by a drive motor 22 to propel the vehicle body 1, and with a steering motor 19 used to adjust/change a predetermined reference direction of the drive unit with respect to the vehicle body.
Wada teaches a drive unit (with a drive frame 85 and drive wheels 81, 82) that is pivoted to a vehicle body 92 about a vertical axis via a coupling device 91, 93, with the drive wheels 81, 82 being driven differentially by drive motors 86, 87 to turn/steer the vehicle body 92, with a turning motor 94 used to adjust/change a predetermined reference direction of the drive unit with respect to the vehicle body 92, and with the drive motors 86, 87 and the turning motor 94 being controlled to guide the vehicle body 92 along a predetermined path K while keeping the vehicle body 92 in a desired orientation.
Wang et al. teaches a drive unit (with a drive frame 5 and drive wheels 8) that is pivoted to a vehicle body 1 about a vertical axis via a coupling device 3, with the drive wheels 8 being driven differentially to turn/steer the vehicle body 1 while turning motors 6 are in a braked state, and with the turning motors 6 used to adjust/change a predetermined reference direction of the drive unit with respect to the vehicle body 1 prior to the drive wheels 8 being driven differentially to translate the vehicle body 1 in a different direction.
Wright teaches plural drive units 101 used together to transport a heavy load. Each drive unit 101 comprises drive wheels 104 driven by respective drive motors 135. Each drive unit 101 is pivoted to a load attachment member 130 about a vertical axis via a coupling device 129, 164, with the drive wheels 104 being driven differentially to turn/steer the drive unit 101 relative to the load. Alternatively, the drive wheels can be steered independently.
Yan et al. teaches a drive unit (with a drive frame 1 and drive wheels 3) that is pivoted to a vehicle body 9 about a vertical axis via a coupling device 2, with the drive wheels 3 being driven differentially to turn/steer the vehicle body 9, and with the drive wheels 3 being driven differentially to adjust/change a predetermined reference direction of the drive unit with respect to the vehicle body 9.
Specification Objections
The amended abstract is objected to because:
It inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, a single coupling device, and a single steering device.
It inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a “steering device”. According to ¶¶ 0024-0025, the preferred embodiment comprises “intangible means” in the form of a “rotation speed control on the wheels”. Such a steering control via control of the wheels (i.e., steering by differential driving of the wheels) does not constitute a “steering device”. Rather, it constitutes a steering control system that utilizes the drive motors (not a distinct “steering device”) to produce turning/steering.
The specification is objected to because:
The summary of the invention (¶¶ 0006-0007) inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, a single coupling device, a single wheel, a single travel drive source, and a single steering device.
The summary of the invention (¶¶ 0006-0007) inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a “steering device”. See the explanation above.
¶ 0011 is inaccurate because it describes the travel path 9 as including a single linear section 91, but then goes on to state that the single linear section includes two sections. A single section cannot be comprised as plural sections. Rather, these are separate sections.
¶ 0012 is inaccurate because it distinguishes between (i) “physical means” such as rails, and (ii) “soft means” such as a magnetic marker, a light reflection tape, an electromagnetic induction cable, or a two-dimensional marker defining a “virtual” path. While different in structure than rails, a magnetic marker, a light reflection tape, an electromagnetic induction cable, or a two-dimensional marker is still a “physical” structure.
In ¶ 0013, “of a vehicle body 2” (l. 5) should read “of its vehicle body 2” to avoid confusion. Note that the structure labeled by reference character C is previously described as “a vehicle body”
In ¶ 0013, “Figs. 2, 3” (l. 1) should read “Figs. 2 and 3”.
¶ 0013 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, and a single coupling device.
¶ 0018 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a “steering device”. See the explanation above.
¶ 0021 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single wheel, and a single travel drive source.
¶¶ 0022-0025 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a “steering device”. See the explanation above.
¶ 0024 inaccurately characterizes the steering device, when in the form of a rotation speed control, as being “intangible means”. A steering control system that utilizes the drive motors (not a distinct “steering device”) to produce turning/steering is not “intangible”.
In ¶ 0026, “Figs. 2, 3” (l. 1) should read “Figs. 2 and 3”.
¶ 0026 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, and a single coupling device.
¶¶ 0028-0029 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a “steering device”. See the explanation above.
¶¶ 0028-0029 are inaccurate because they describe a single “steering device” as comprising both a front-wheel steering device and a rear-wheel steering device. A single device cannot be comprised as plural devices. Rather, these are separate structures/systems.
¶ 0030 is confusing because it describes the power supply device 51 as a “secondary” battery, but no “primary” battery (or power supply) is discussed in the specification.
¶ 0031 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single travel drive source.
In ¶ 0032, “Figs. 2, 3 illustrates” (l. 1) should read “Figs. 2 and 3 illustrate”.
¶ 0033 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, and a single coupling device. The paragraph should refer to the front drive unit 3F and the front coupling device 4F since only the front drive unit and coupling device is shown in Fig. 5.
¶¶ 0034-0036 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit. These paragraphs should refer to the front drive unit 3F since only the front drive unit is shown in Fig. 5.
¶ 0036 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a “steering device”. See the explanation above.
¶¶ 0037-0038 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a single drive unit, and a single coupling device.
In ¶ 0038, “Figs. 2, 3” (l. 1) should read “Figs. 2 and 3”.
¶ 0038 is confusing and inaccurate because it describes the attachment section 41 as “formed in a deformed home-base shape with its end being cut”. Is the term “home-base” a reference to baseball? If so, that reference should be clarified. Further, in a baseball, a home base has the shape of an irregular pentagon, but Figs. 6 and 7 show the plate 41 as having the shape of an irregular hexagon.
¶ 0040 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single drive unit, and a single coupling device.
¶ 0040 is confusing and inaccurate because it describes the attachment section 41 as “having a deformed home base shape”. See explanation above.
¶ 0041 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single adjustment mechanism.
¶¶ 0042-0044 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a single drive unit.
¶ 0045 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single adjustment mechanism.
¶ 0041 is inaccurate because it describes the adjustment mechanism as comprising a single through-hole 42B, a single fixing bolt 42A, and a single threaded engagement hole. As shown in Fig. 7, the adjustment mechanism has four through-holes 42B, four fixing bolts 42A, and four threaded engagement holes. No embodiment of an adjustment mechanism is described, which is capable of performing the reference direction adjustment function, and which has only a single through-hole and a single fixing bolt.
¶ 0053 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a “steering device”. See the explanation above.
¶ 0059 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a single drive unit, a single coupling device, a single wheel, a single travel drive source, and a single steering device.
¶¶ 0059-0060 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a “steering device”. See the explanation above.
¶ 0060 inaccurately characterizes the invention as comprising a single adjustment mechanism, and a single drive unit.
¶ 0061 is inaccurate and confusing because:
It defines the reference direction as being changed “within γ°” whereas Figs. 6-7 depict the reference direction as being changed by γ°. The examiner suggests amending “within γ°” to read “by γ°”.
It defines γ as “a preset value equal to or more than θ” whereas the specification discloses that (i) θ° is slightly larger than 90°, and (ii) γ° is 90°.
¶ 0063 is inaccurate and confusing because:
It defines the reference direction as being changed “by a unit of 90° within γ°” whereas the specification describes the reference direction as being changed by a multiple of 90°. The examiner suggests amending “a unit of 90° within γ°” to read “a multiple of 90°”.
It defines γ more broadly as “a preset value equal to or more than 90” whereas prior ¶ 0061 defines γ more narrowly as “a preset value equal to or more than θ”.
¶¶ 0065-0066 inaccurately characterize the invention as comprising a single drive unit.
¶ 0067 is inaccurate because it recites “the drive unit include a front-wheel unit and a rear-wheel unit” (ll. 1-2). The same drive unit cannot comprise both the front-wheel drive unit and the rear-wheel drive unit. Rather, these are separate drive units.
¶ 0067 is inaccurate because it recites “the coupling device include a front coupling device and a rear coupling device” (l. 2). The same coupling device cannot comprise both the front coupling device and the rear coupling device. Rather, these are separate coupling devices.
¶ 0067 is inaccurate because it recites “the front-wheel unit include, as the wheel, a right front wheel and a left front wheel coaxial with each other…and the rear-wheel unit include, as the wheel, a right rear wheel and a left rear wheel coaxial with each other” (ll. 2-5). A single wheel cannot be comprised as all of a right front wheel, a left front wheel, a right rear wheel, and a left rear wheel. Rather, these are four separate wheels.
¶ 0067 is confusing because it recites “the front-wheel unit include, as the wheel, a right front wheel and a left front wheel coaxial with each other, and be coupled with the vehicle body via the front coupling device” (ll. 2-4). It is unclear whether the limitation “and be coupled with…” applies to the front-wheel unit as a whole, the recited “wheel”, the right front wheel, or the left front wheel.
¶ 0067 is confusing because it recites “the rear-wheel unit include, as the wheel, a right rear wheel and a left rear wheel coaxial with each other, and be coupled with the vehicle body via the rear coupling device” (ll. 4-6). It is unclear whether the limitation “and be coupled with…” applies to the rear-wheel unit as a whole, the recited “wheel”, the right rear wheel, or the left rear wheel.
Drawing Objections
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) for failing to show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a steering device configured to turn the pair of wheels around a steering axis (claim 1, ll. 9-10) must be shown in the drawings or canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are also objected to because:
Figs. 2 and 3 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q). Lead lines are those lines between the reference characters and the details referred to. They must originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated. However, in Figs. 2-3, the lead lines for reference numbers 34, 34F and 34R do not extend to the “steering device” (or front and rear steering devices) described in the specification. Rather, no “steering device” is shown in the figures.
In Fig. 5, the battery 51 should be represented by a dashed line since it is hidden from view by the storage section 22. See Figs. 2 and 3.
The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on June 26, 2026 have been considered.
With respect to GROUND 1, applicant argues that it is unnecessary to disclose in detail that which is conventional or well known. This argument fails because applicant’s claimed invention is not conventional or well known. For example, applicant’s invention includes a steering device that functions to turn the pair of wheels around a steering axis, but applicant has not disclosed any specific manner in which such a device is structured or functions. Likewise, applicant’s invention includes an adjustment mechanism that functions to change the reference direction around the steering axis, and applicant’s specification indicates that the recited adjustment mechanism covers an embodiment having some type of adjustment motor, some type of gear transmission mechanism and some type of link transmission mechanism, but applicant has not disclosed any specific manner in which such a mechanism is structured or functions. Vague concepts and hypothetical possibilities do not constitute a complete written description.
With respect to GROUND 1, applicant argues that the description is presumed to be adequate unless sufficient evidence or reasoning to the contrary has been presented by the examiner to rebut the presumption. This argument fails because the examiner has presented sufficient evidence/reasoning to the contrary.
With respect to GROUND 2, applicant argues that the disclosure coupled with information known in the art describe how to make and how to use the invention to one reasonably skilled in the art without undue experimentation. The examiner disagrees because applicant’s claims are crafted to encompass essentially any and all possible forms of construction while no specific form of construction is disclosed. As a result, the scope of the claims far exceeds the scope of the disclosure, leaving the skilled artisan to develop their own solutions in order to produce an embodiment(s) reading on the claims.
With respect to GROUND 3, applicant argues that the claims set out and circumscribe subject matter with a reasonable degree of clarity and particularity. The examiner disagrees for the reasons detailed above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the specification and drawings are not persuasive because the substitute specification and the replacement drawing sheets have not been entered.
With respect to the objection under 37 CFR 1.83(a), applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because no “steering device” is illustrated in the drawings. A black box is used to illustrate the control device 52, and the use of such a black box is an appropriate and conventional manner of illustrating a control unit. However, the same black box cannot also satisfy the requirement to illustrate the claimed “steering device”. No such “device” is shown in the drawings.
Final Action
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)
Response Period
A shortened statutory period for response is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
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.
Filing and Contact Information
All correspondence relating to this application should be directed:
By Patent Center1: Registered users may submit via the Patent Center at: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/
By Mail2 to: Commissioner for Patents
United States Patent & Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
By FAX to: (571) 273-8300
By hand: Customer Service Window
Knox Building
501 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter English whose telephone number is (571)272-6671. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00 am - 6:00 pm EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eileen Lillis, can be reached at 571-272-6928.
/PETER C ENGLISH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3993
1 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).
2 Mail Stop REISSUE should only be used for the initial filing of reissue applications, and should not be used for any subsequently filed correspondence in reissue applications. See MPEP 1410.
Prosecution Insights