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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 15 have been examined.
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 1 – 15 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.
Claims 1 and 12 each positively recite “a working machine,” “a first driven axle,” and “a second driven axle.” Based on the figures and specification, it appears that only one of each of these components exists, but the current claim language would indicate that two instances of each of these components exists. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1 – 5, 7 – 10, 12 – 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nilsson (2019/0118640) in view of Schwarz et al. (5,044,458). In regard to claim 1, Nilsson discloses a drivetrain of a working machine comprising at least a first driven axle and a second driven axle (Fig. 3, items 1 and 3), an electric traction motor (Fig. 3, item 30), a transmission (Fig. 3, items 40 and 50), and an axle disengagement device (Fig. 3, item 4), wherein a drive shaft of the transmission is connected to a driven shaft of the electric traction motor (Fig. 3), wherein a first driven shaft of the transmission is connected to a drive shaft of the axle disengagement device (Fig. 3), wherein a driven shaft of the axle disengagement device is configured to be connected to the first axle (Fig. 3), wherein a second driven shaft of the transmission is configured to be connected to the second axle (Fig. 3), and wherein the driven shaft of the electric traction motor, the first driven shaft of the transmission and the second driven shaft of the transmission extend in one plane (Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 2, Nilsson discloses wherein the drive shaft of the transmission also extends in the plane (Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 3, Nilsson discloses wherein the drive shaft of the axle disengagement device also extends in the plane (Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 4, Nilsson discloses wherein the driven shaft of the axle disengagement device also extends in the plane (Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 5, Nilsson discloses wherein respective shafts of the drivetrain extending in the plane are arranged axially parallel to one another (Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 7, Nilsson discloses wherein the plane extends in a transverse direction of the vehicle (Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 9, Nilsson discloses wherein the drivetrain comprises a control device for the axle disengagement device, and wherein the control device is arranged on the transmission (paragraph 23).
Nilsson does not disclose varying sized wheels. In regard to claim 1, Schwarz discloses a drivetrain of a working vehicle wherein respective wheels of a first driven axle have a smaller effective diameter than respective wheels of a second axle (Fig. 1, items 12 and 14).
In regard to claim 12, Schwarz discloses wherein the working machine has the first driven axle and the second driven axle and wherein respective wheels of the first axle have a smaller effective diameter than respective wheels of the second axle (Fig. 1).
In regard to claim 13, Schwarz discloses wherein the first axle is arranged offset to the second axle in a vertical direction of the vehicle (inherent in a vehicle utilizing differing diameter wheels).
The addition of these features would result in a predictable variation that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize as no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions, which has been held unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), absent evidence that the modifications necessary to effect the combination of elements is uniquely challenging or difficult for one of ordinary skill in the art. Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BAPI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Nilsson in view of Schwarz does not disclose the use of a neutral position for the transmission or a parking brake. In regard to claims 8 and 10, Official Notice is taken that a neutral gear in a transmission and a parking brake are both old and well known in the art, and one of ordinary skill in the art would be well within their level of knowledge to provide them in a modern vehicle.
In regard to claim 15, the language relating to the use of the drivetrain in a backhoe loader is considered to be a recitation of intended use. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nilsson (2019/0118640) in view of Schwarz et al. (5,044,458) as applied to claims 1 – 5, 7 – 10, 12 – 13, and 15 above, and further in view of Young et al. (5,551,526). Nilsson in view of Schwarz does not disclose the use of wheel hub transmissions. In regard to claim 14, Young discloses a working machine comprising at least a first driven axle or a second driven axle including a wheel hub transmission (Fig. 1, items 24, 26, 76, and 78).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the wheel hub transmission of Young, to the working machine of Nilsson in view of Schwarz, in order to effectively and efficiently control braking and power distribution to the wheels.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 11 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Nilsson (2019/0118640) discloses a drivetrain of a working machine similar to the instant invention; however Nilsson, either alone or in combination, neither discloses nor suggests a drivetrain of a working machine wherein (in regard to claim 6) wherein the first driven shaft of the transmission is arranged coaxially to the driven shaft of the electric traction motor and wherein the second driven shaft of the transmission is arranged offset to the first driven shaft of the transmission, and (in regard to claim 11) wherein the first driven shaft of the transmission is connected to the drive shaft of the axle disengagement device by means of a first cardan shaft and wherein the second driven shaft of the transmission is connected to the second axle by means of a second cardan shaft. These limitations, in combination with each and every other independent claim limitation, are not shown in the currently cited prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Greaves et al. (5,441,136) disclose a four wheel drive vehicle;
Radtke et al. (11,198,600) disclose a work vehicle with electrical energy storage.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN DANIEL WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)272-8269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (PT).
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
/JOHN D WALTERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613