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 .
Status of Claims
This is the final non-final office action on the merits of Application No. 18/627,910 filed on 04/05/2024. Claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 14-16 are new claims.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. The certified copy has been filed with application no DE10 2023 203 216.3, filed on 04/06/2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter, which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the second region" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 16 depends on claim 1 and claim 1 does not recite a second region. It is suggested to change the limitation to “the second housing region”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
Claims 1-3, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukishima et al. (US 20130292994 A1) (hereinafter “Yukishima”) in view of MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH et al. (WO 2023099440 A1)(hereinafter “MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH”).
Regarding claim 1, Yukishima discloses a drive unit (21, figs. 1-11, paras 42-49) for an electrically driven vehicle (11, fig. 8), wherein the drive unit (21) comprises
an electric machine (e.g. A, fig. 1), which is designed to accelerate and/or brake the vehicle (11) ,
a transmission unit (B, fig. 1) arranged adjacent to the electric machine (A), which is designed to transform a rotational speed of an output shaft (24a) of the electric machine (A) to an output rotational speed of a transmission output shaft (28, para 49) of the transmission unit (B), and
a friction brake unit (C, fig. 1) arranged adjacent to the transmission unit (B) and supplied with a functional fluid for cooling and/or lubrication, which is designed to convert kinetic energy of the transmission output shaft (25) into thermal energy by means of friction, and
a housing having a first housing region (22a, fig. 1), in which the electric machine (24) is arranged, a second housing region (22b) , in which the transmission unit (B) is arranged, and a third housing region (22d), in which the friction brake unit (C) is arranged, wherein the first housing region, the second housing region and the third housing region are formed integrally with one another. (see the definition of integral as attached)
But Yukishima fails to disclose the friction brake unit supplied with a functional fluid for cooling or lubrication, which is designed to convert kinetic energy of the transmission output shaft into thermal energy by means of friction, and wherein at least the third housing region is sealed off with respect to the environment.
MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH teaches a drive system (1, figs. 1-3) wherein a multi-disk fluid-cooled wet brakes (52, figs. 1-3) is designed to convert kinetic energy of the transmission output shaft (e.g. 12, 11, fig. 3) into thermal energy by means of friction, and wherein at least the third housing region (has no character numeral, the region brake 52 is located as shown in fig. 1) is sealed off (see housing 8 in fig. 1) with respect to the environment.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima by substituting the housing and the brake as taught by MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH in order to achieve the scaling the brakes by designing with a variable circular friction lining, which can be scaled separately in number and diameter. Furthermore, the wet brake, it is particularly advantageous that the dissipation of frictional heat takes place through a volume flow of a cooling liquid. The heat can thus also be transported particularly favorably to distant positions in the vehicle F, where it can be used, for example, to heat the interior or released into the environment. Moreover, multi-disk wet brake provides low maintenance requirements or no maintenance requirements.
As modified, the drive unit would have the friction brake unit supplied with a functional fluid for cooling or lubrication, which is designed to convert kinetic energy of the transmission output shaft into thermal energy by means of friction, and wherein at least the third housing region is sealed off with respect to the environment.
Regarding claim 2, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses the drive unit (21) as modified according to claim 1, Yukishima further discloses wherein the electric machine (A), the transmission unit (B) and the friction brake unit (C) are arranged coaxially in the housing.
Regarding claim 3, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses the drive unit (21) as modified according to claim 1, MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH further discloses wherein the friction brake unit (52, fig. 1) is a multi-disk brake unit.
Regarding claim 8, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses the drive unit (21) as modified according to claim 1, Yukishima further discloses wherein the transmission unit (B) is arranged between the electric machine (A) and the friction brake unit (C).
Regarding claim 9, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses the drive unit (21) as modified according to claim 1, Yukishima further discloses wherein the transmission output shaft (28) is designed to be connected to a wheel input shaft (e.g. 32) of a wheel (14) of the vehicle (11).
Regarding claim 10, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses a vehicle (11, fig. 8) having a drive unit (21 fig. 1) as claimed in claim 1. (Please see the rejection of claim 1 above)
Regarding claim 11, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses the drive unit (21) as modified according to claim 2, MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH further discloses wherein the friction brake unit (52, fig. 1) is a multi-disk brake unit.
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukishima et al. (US 20130292994 A1) in view of MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH et al. (WO 2023099440 A1) and further in view of WOOLMER (US 20220247291 A1).
Regarding claims 4 and 12, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses all the elements of the drive unit (21, fig. 1) as claimed in claims 1 and 2, respectively, but fails to disclose wherein the electric machine (A) is an axial flux machine.
WOOLMER discloses an axial flux machine as shown in figs. 1-12.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH by substituting the electric machine with an axial flux one taught by WOOLMER in order to increase power density of electric machines for space and performance gains.
As modified, the drive unit would have an axial flow machine.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukishima et al. (US 20130292994 A1) in view of MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH et al. (WO 2023099440 A1) and further in view of Nakano (US 20070247001 A1).
Regarding claims 5 and 13, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses all the elements of the drive unit (21, fig. 1) as claimed in claims 1 and 2, respectively, but fails to disclose wherein the housing has one or more supply openings for the functional fluid.
Nakano discloses a braking device for vehicle (2, figs. 1-4) wherein the housing (4, 5, fig. 1) has one or more supply openings (e.g. via passage 27) for the functional fluid.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH by adding one or more supply openings for the functional fluid as taught by Nakano so that cooling or lubricating fluid can be delivered efficiently.
As modified, the drive unit would have one or more supply openings for the functional fluid.
Claims 6-7 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukishima et al. (US 20130292994 A1) in view of et al. MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH et al. (WO 2023099440 A1) and further in view of Eastman (US 9505299 B1).
Regarding claim 6, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses all the elements of the drive unit (21, fig. 1) as claimed in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the third housing region is fluidly connected to the second housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the transmission unit.
Eastman teaches a similar kind of a drive unit (40, figs. 1-4) wherein the third housing region (e.g. 50, the region of the housing belongs to the brake 76, fig. 2) is fluidly connected to the second housing region (e.g. 44, the region of the motor 46, fig. 3) in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating a transmission unit 52.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH by adding one or more supply openings for the functional fluid as taught by Eastman so that a low cost and robust method of moving lubricating fluid from one component to other components of the drive arrangement.
As modified, the drive unit would have the third housing region is fluidly connected to the second housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the transmission unit.
Regarding claim 7, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses all the elements of the drive unit (21, fig. 1) as claimed in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the third housing region is fluidly connected to the first housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the electric machine.
Eastman teaches a similar kind of a drive unit (40, figs. 1-4) wherein the third housing region (e.g. 50, the region of the housing belongs to the brake 76, fig. 2) is fluidly connected to the first housing region (e.g. 44, the region of the motor 46, fig. 2) in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating an electric motor (46, fig. 2). (see fig. 3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH by adding one or more supply openings for the functional fluid as taught by Eastman so that a low cost and robust method of moving lubricating fluid from one component to other components of the drive arrangement.
As modified, the drive unit would have the third housing region is fluidly connected to the first housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the electric machine.
Regarding claim 14, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses all the elements of the drive unit (21, fig. 1) as claimed in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the third housing region is fluidly connected to only the second housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the transmission unit.
Eastman teaches a similar kind of a drive unit (40, figs. 1-4) wherein the third housing region (e.g. 50, the region of the housing belongs to the brake 76, fig. 2) is fluidly connected to only the second housing region (e.g. 44, the region of the motor 46, fig. 3) in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating a transmission unit 52.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH by adding one or more supply openings for the functional fluid as taught by Eastman so that a low cost and robust method of moving lubricating fluid from one component to other components of the drive arrangement.
As modified, the drive unit would have the third housing region is fluidly connected to only the second housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the transmission unit.
Regarding claim 15, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses all the elements of the drive unit (21, fig. 1) as claimed in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the third housing region is fluidly connected to only the first housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the electric machine.
Eastman teaches a similar kind of a drive unit (40, figs. 1-4) wherein the third housing region (e.g. 50, the region of the housing belongs to the brake 76, fig. 2) is fluidly connected to only the first housing region (e.g. 44, the region of the motor 46, fig. 2) in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating an electric motor (46, fig. 2). (see fig. 3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH by adding one or more supply openings for the functional fluid as taught by Eastman so that a low cost and robust method of moving lubricating fluid from one component to other components of the drive arrangement.
As modified, the drive unit would have the third housing region is fluidly connected to only the first housing region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the electric machine.
Regarding claim 16, Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH discloses all the elements of the drive unit (21, fig. 1) as claimed in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the third housing region is fluidly connected to the first housing region and the second region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the transmission unit and the electric machine.
Eastman teaches a similar kind of a drive unit (40, figs. 1-4) wherein the third housing region (e.g. 50, the region of the housing belongs to the brake 76, fig. 2) is fluidly connected to the first housing region (e.g. 44, the region of the motor 46, fig. 2) and the second region (e.g. region of between walls 68 and 70, fig. 3) in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating a transmission unit (52, fig. 2) and an electric motor (46, fig. 2). (see fig. 3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima/ MÜLLER-LINKOWITSCH by adding one or more supply openings for the functional fluid as taught by Eastman so that a low cost and robust method of moving lubricating fluid from one component to other components of the drive arrangement.
As modified, the drive unit would have the third housing region is fluidly connected to the first housing region and the second region in such a way that the functional fluid of the friction brake unit can also be used for cooling and/or lubricating the transmission unit and the electric machine.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument filed on 02/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive per the reason set forth below.
Applicant argues that “Applicant respectfully submits that it would NOT have "been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yukishima by substituting the housing and the brake as taught by MULLER-LINKOWITSCH in order to achieve the scaling the brakes by designing with a variable circular friction lining, which can be scaled separately in number and diameter" as asserted on page 4 of the Office Action. On the contrary, in this particular case, the Examiner's proposed modification would render the prior art being modified (i.e., Yukishima) unsatisfactory for intended purpose of decreasing the number of parts and minimize the axial dimensions by arbitrarily replacing the conventional drum brake unit or disk brake unit of Yukishima with the multi-disk fluid cooled wet brakes of Muller-Linkowitsch. Accordingly, for at least the reasons set forth above, claim 1 should be allowable.
This is not persuasive. The applicant does not mention any evidence of non-obviousness. A showing of unsatisfactory results of prior art combination must be based on evidence, not argument or speculation. A mere conclusion of nonobviousness is not enough to show unsatisfactory results. Evidence of unsatisfactory properties may be in the form of a direct or indirect comparison of the claimed invention with the closest prior art which is commensurate in scope with the claims. See In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 716.02.
As MULLER-LINKOWITSCH does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed (the friction brake unit supplied with a functional fluid for cooling or lubrication, which is designed to convert kinetic energy of the transmission output shaft into thermal energy by means of friction), the reference does not destroy the intended purpose of Yukishima “decreasing the number of parts and minimize the axial dimensions by arbitrarily replacing the conventional drum brake unit or disk brake unit”. Moreover, MULLER-LINKOWITSCH reference is directed to a better possibilities for scaling the brake and the application depending on vehicle weight and drive unit (see para 20 of machine translation of MULLER-LINKOWITSCH) which indicates decreasing the number of parts based on need of the drive unit of the vehicle. The brake unit 52 of the MULLER-LINKOWITSCH reference is a disk brake with multiple disks which is designed to participate in the cooling management of the drive unit. Therefore, examiner respectfully disagrees.
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 FARHANA PERVIN whose telephone number is (571)272-4644. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
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, Jacob S. Scott can be reached on 5712703415. 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.
/FARHANA PERVIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights