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 .
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.
Claims 16-20 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “a sun gear that includes a sun gear shaft and meshes with the ring gear” in lines 5-6. It is unclear to the Examiner how the sun gear is able to mesh with the ring gear. Examiner believes the applicant is describing the sun gear meshing with the planetary gears. Appropriate correction is requested.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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(s) 16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE JONG et al. (US 8,839,854) in view of KLEIN-HITPASS (US 10,648,542).
Regarding claim 16, DE JONG discloses a drilling machine system (Figs. 3-4E), comprising: a gearbox (100) including: a planetary reduction (110) and a motor (60) directly rotationally coupled to an input coupling (via 56).
DE JONG does not show a simple planetary reduction solely including a grounded ring gear, a carrier directly coupled to an output coupling, a plurality of planet gears that are rotationally coupled to the carrier and mesh with the ring gear, and a sun gear that includes a sun gear shaft and meshes with the planetary gears; and a floating input coupling directly coupled to or formed in the sun gear shaft that is included in the simple planetary reduction; wherein the floating input coupling is unsupported by a bearing.
KLEIN teaches a planetary simple reduction (30) including a grounded ring gear (33), a carrier (32) directly coupled to an output coupling (19), a plurality of planet gears (34) that are rotationally coupled to the carrier (32) and mesh with the ring gear (33), and a sun gear (19) that includes a sun gear shaft (47); and a floating input coupling directly coupled to or formed in the sun gear shaft (47) that is included in the simple planetary reduction; wherein the floating input coupling (47) is unsupported by a bearing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have the details of the planetary reduction taught by KLEIN be used in the drilling machine system of DE JONG, since both utilize a planetary gearing system to transfer rotational torque from an input to an output. The substitution of one planetary gear system for another would have led to the predicable result of a gearing reduction system. KLEIN is used to teach the details of a planetary gearing system, as the base reference does not provide the details of the planetary structure.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of DE JONG-KLEIN discloses a gap is formed between an outer surface of the floating input coupling and a section of the carrier in the simple planetary reduction.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of DE JONG-KLEIN discloses a rotary drive drilling tool rotationally coupled to the carrier.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE JONG et al. (US 8,839,854) in view of KLEIN-HITPASS (US 10,648,542) as applied to claims 1-3, 5-16, and 18-20 above, and further in view of RAYNER (US 10,295,020).
Regarding claims 4 and 17, the combination of DE JONG-KLEIN discloses the drilling system having a motor and the floating input coupling is configured to directly rotationally couple to the motor.
The combination of DE JONG-KLEIN does not disclose the motor being a hydraulic motor.
RAYNER teaches a machine for earth drilling (col. 3-20), wherein a motor can be hydraulic, electric, or pneumatic (col. 4, lines 62-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the electric motor disclosed by combination of DE JONG-KLEIN with a hydraulic motor, as RAYNER teaches the type of motor is a matter of design choice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-12, and 15 are allowed.
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 16-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection necessitated by the 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 DEREK D. KNIGHT whose telephone number is (571)272-7951. The examiner can normally be reached Telework: From 5:30am-1:30pm 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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
/DEREK D KNIGHT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655