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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 claims 1-11. Claims 12-38 are withdrawn in the reply filed on 6/3/26 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Raab et al (US PG Pub No. 2017/0274767).
Regarding claim 1, Raab teaches An engine assembly of an off-road vehicle, the engine assembly comprising:
an engine (1 figure 2 paragraph 50) configured to generate a power;
the engine (7) comprising a crankcase (2 figure 2 paragraph 50); a crankshaft (paragraph 55 crankshaft) housed in the crankcase; and a generator coupled to the crankshaft (paragraph 55 gear wheel 50 driven by crankshaft), the generator being selected from an internal generator (25 figure 4 expansion machine paragraph 52-54) and
an external alternator; (24 figure 4 paragraph 52, 53, 55 generator)
wherein the crankshaft is the same for the engine having any one of the internal generator and the external alternator. (paragraph 55 shaft 42 is connected to gearwheel 50 of rear gear drive… driven by crankshaft).
Regarding claim 2, Raab teaches wherein the engine with the internal generator (25 figure 4) is configured to have a first width and the engine with the external alternator (24 figure 4) is configured to have a second width, wherein the first width of the engine assembly is within ten percent of the second width of the engine assembly. (figure 4)
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raab et al (US PG Pub No. 2017/0274767)
Regarding claim 2, Raab teaches wherein the engine with the internal generator (25 figure 4) is configured to have a first width and the engine with the external alternator (24 figure 4) is configured to have a second width,
Raab does not explicitly teach wherein the first width of the engine assembly is within ten percent of the second width of the engine assembly. However Raab does teach those components and how packaging is optimized (figure 4) and it would be obvious to do to optimize packaging.
Raab discloses the claimed invention except for the first and second width being withing 10% of each other. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to except for the first and second width being withing 10% of each other, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raab et al (US PG Pub No. 2017/0274767) in view of Rients (DE102011082019)
Regarding claim 4, Raab teaches wherein the external alternator (24 figure 1) is coupled to the crankshaft using an external alternator (44 figure 4) assembly
Raab does not explicitly teach however Rients teaches, the external alternator (20 figure 1) assembly comprising a pulley (16 figure 1) and a belt (30 figure 1), wherein the pulley is configured to be secured on a second end of the crankshaft and is configured to be rotated corresponding to rotation of the crankshaft (16 input pulley figure 1 abstract), and wherein the belt is configured to transfer the rotation of the pulley to the external alternator for operating the external alternator.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Raab based on the teachings of Rients to teach the external alternator assembly comprising a pulley and a belt, wherein the pulley is configured to be secured on a second end of the crankshaft and is configured to be rotated corresponding to rotation of the crankshaft, and wherein the belt is configured to transfer the rotation of the pulley to the external alternator for operating the external alternator. The motivation would be to have minimal packaging space (Rients page 1).
Regarding claim 5, Raab does not explicitly teach however Rients teaches comprising a compressor coupled with the crankshaft via the external alternator assembly, wherein the belt of the external alternator assembly is configured to couple the compressor to the pulley secured on the crankshaft and operate the compressor according to a rotation of the crankshaft.(page 1 brake air compressor paragraph 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Raab based on the teachings of Rients to teach comprising a compressor coupled with the crankshaft via the external alternator assembly, wherein the belt of the external alternator assembly is configured to couple the compressor to the pulley secured on the crankshaft and operate the compressor according to a rotation of the crankshaft. The motivation would be to have minimal packaging space (Rients page 1).
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raab et al (US PG Pub No. 2017/0274767) in view of Wilson et al (US Patent No. 7,400,053)
Regarding claim 9, Raab does not explicitly teach however Wilson teaches comprising a starter motor (240 stator cover figure 3 column 3 line 15-35) assembly having a gear assembly and a starter motor, wherein the starter motor assembly is the same for the engine having any one of the internal generator and the external alternator, wherein the gear assembly is positioned behind a pulley in case of the engine having the external alternator or positioned behind a flywheel (210 figure 2) and a stator (220 figure 2) in case of the engine having the internal generator.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Raab based on the teachings of Wilson to teach comprising a starter motor assembly having a gear assembly and a starter motor, wherein the starter motor assembly is the same for the engine having any one of the internal generator and the external alternator, wherein the gear assembly is positioned behind a pulley in case of the engine having the external alternator or positioned behind a flywheel and a stator in case of the engine having the internal generator. The motivation would be to have a compact engine package (Wilson column 1 line 30-40)
Regarding claim 10, Raab does not explicitly teach however Wilson teaches further comprising a starter motor assembly positioned adjacent the crankcase, beneath an air intake of the engine. (figure 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Raab based on the teachings of Wilson to teach further comprising a starter motor assembly positioned adjacent the crankcase, beneath an air intake of the engine. The motivation would be to have a compact engine package (Wilson column 1 line 30-40).
Regarding claim 11, Raab does not explicitly teach however Wilson teaches further comprising further comprising a starter motor assembly positioned adjacent the crankcase, beneath an exhaust port of the engine. (figure 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Raab based on the teachings of Wilson to teach further comprising a starter motor assembly positioned adjacent the crankcase, beneath an exhaust port of the engine. The motivation would be to have a compact engine package (Wilson column 1 line 30-40).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 6-8 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C. JIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9898. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM.
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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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.
/GEORGE C JIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights