Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/702,536

MULTI-SPEED CONCENTRIC TWIN-SHAFT TRANSMISSION

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Apr 18, 2024
Priority
Oct 18, 2021 — provisional 63/256,702 +1 more
Examiner
ENGLISH, JAMES A
Art Unit
3614
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Emerson Electric Co.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
941 granted / 1159 resolved
+29.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
1171
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
84.4%
+44.4% vs TC avg
§102
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§112
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1159 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . 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 54 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 53 introduces the element “a clutch arrangement disposed within the housing and including a first clutch assembly and a second clutch assembly” (emphasis added.) Claim 54, dependent from claim 53, then introduces the element “a clutch assembly”. It is unclear whether the “clutch assembly” in claim 54 is referring to the “clutch assembly” in claim 53 or is a separate “clutch assembly”. 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. Claims 44-46 and 61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Genise et al. (WO 2016/077306 A1), as cited by Applicant. With respect to claim 44, Genise et al. discloses a transmission comprising: a) a shaft arrangement including an input shaft (102) configured to couple to a prime mover (MTD paragraph 18) and an output shaft (103) coaxially aligned (figs. 1-2) with the input shaft; b) a plurality of drive gears supported by the shaft arrangement and including a first drive gear (113), a second drive gear (114), and a third drive gear (115); c) a countershaft arrangement including a first countershaft (116A) and a second countershaft (116B) supporting a plurality of pinion gears (104A, 105A, 106A) intermeshed with the first (113), second (114), and third (115) drive gears; and d) a clutch arrangement (108, 109) including a first clutch assembly (108) and a second clutch assembly (109) operable to lock the first (113), second (114), and third (115) drive gears to the shaft arrangement to selectively provide four gear ratios (paragraphs 14, 20, 24, ) between the input (102) and output (103) shafts. (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 6-63.) With respect to claim 45, Genise et al. discloses the first clutch assembly (108) is operable (paragraph 26) between: a) a neutral position (paragraphs 32, 48-62) in which the first (113) and second (114) drive gears are rotatable with respect to the input shaft (102); b) a first position (paragraph 32) in which the first drive gear (113) is locked to the input shaft (102) and the second drive gear (114) is rotatable with respect to the input shaft (102) (paragraphs 21, 23, 25, 33-36, 39); and c) a second position (paragraph 32) in which the first drive gear (113) is rotatable with respect to the input shaft (102) and the second drive gear (114) is locked to the input shaft (paragraphs 21, 23, 25, 33-36, 39); wherein the second clutch assembly (109) is operable (paragraph 26) between: d) a neutral position (paragraphs 32, 48-62) in which the second (114) and third (115) drive gears are rotatable with respect to the output shaft (103); e) a first position (paragraph 35) in which the second drive gear (114) is locked to the output shaft (103) and the third drive gear (115) is rotatable with respect to the output shaft (paragraphs 21, 23, 25, 33-36, 39); and f) a second position (paragraph 35) in which the second drive gear (114) is rotatable with respect to the output shaft (103) and the third drive gear (115) is locked to the output shaft (103) (paragraphs 21, 23, 25, 33-36, 39). (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 6-63.) With respect to claim 46, Genise et al. discloses the transmission is operable between: a) a first gear ratio (paragraph 21) in which the first clutch assembly (108) is in the first position (paragraph 32) and the second clutch assembly (109) is in the second position (paragraph 35) (paragraphs 21, 23, 25, 33-36, 39); b) a second gear ratio (paragraph 22) in which the first clutch assembly (108) is in the second position (paragraph 32) and the second clutch assembly (109) is in the second position (paragraph 35) (paragraphs 21, 23, 25, 33-36, 39); c) a third gear ratio (paragraph 23) in which the first clutch assembly (108) is in the first position (paragraph 32) and the second clutch assembly (109) is in the first position (paragraph 35); and d) a fourth gear ratio (paragraph 24) in which the first clutch assembly (108) is in the second position (paragraph 32) and the second clutch assembly is in the first position (paragraph 35). (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 6-63.) (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 6-63.) With respect to claim 61, Genise et al. discloses a drivetrain assembly comprising: a) an electric motor having an output shaft (MTD paragraph 18); and b) a transmission assembly operably connected to the electric motor (MTD paragraph 18), the transmission assembly comprising: a) a shaft arrangement including an input shaft (102) coupled to the electric motor output shaft (MTD paragraph 18) and including an output shaft (103) coaxially aligned (figs. 1-2) with the input shaft (102); b) a plurality of drive gears supported by the shaft arrangement and including a first drive gear (113), a second drive gear (114), and a third drive gear (115); c) a countershaft arrangement including a first countershaft (116A) and a second countershaft (116B) supporting a plurality of pinion gears (104A, 105A, 106A) intermeshed with the first (113), second (114), and third (115) drive gears; and d) a clutch arrangement (108, 109) including a first clutch assembly (108) and a second clutch assembly (109) operable to lock the first (113), second (114), and third (115) drive gears to the shaft arrangement to selectively provide four gear ratios (paragraphs 14, 20, 24, ) between the input (102) and output (103) shafts. (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 6-63.) 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 47-50 and 62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genise et al. in view of Muetzel et al. (US 2007/0209902). With respect to claims 47-50 and 62, Genise et al. discloses the first clutch assembly includes a first dog clutch (108) and a first hydraulic actuator (paragraph 26) controlling a position of the first dog clutch (108); wherein the first hydraulic actuator (paragraph 26) is operatively connected to the first dog clutch (108) by a first mechanical linkage (107); wherein the second clutch assembly (109) includes a second dog clutch (109) and a second hydraulic actuator (paragraph 26) controlling a position of the second dog clutch (109); wherein the second hydraulic actuator (paragraph 26) is operatively connected to the second dog clutch (109) by a second mechanical linkage (107; paragraph 26 discussing “applying a like principle of valve operation to second (range) shifter 109”) and wherein the first hydraulic actuator (paragraph 26) is operatively connected to the first dog clutch (108) by a first mechanical linkage (107). (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 6-63.) Genise et al. discloses using a hydraulic actuator instead of an electric actuator. Muetzel et al. teaches of using an electric actuator and position a dog clutch (48) (paragraph 19). (Figs. 1-3, paragraphs 18-19.) Because both Genise et al. and Muetzel et al. teach methods for moving a dog clutch, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute one method (hydraulic actuator) for the other (electric actuator) to achieve the predictable result of moving a dog clutch in a transmission. Claim 51 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genise et al. and Muetzel et al., as applied to claims 44, 47 and 49 above, and further in view of Qin et al. (CN 107763153 A; Machine Translation of Description ‘MTD’). With respect to claim 51, Genise et al., as modified, is silent regarding a housing. Qin et al. teaches of one or both the first (10) and second (20) electrical actuators is located on the exterior of a housing (1) enclosing the transmission elements (fig. 1). (Figs. 1-3, MTD paragraphs 29-67.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the housing structure as described in Qin et al. into the invention of Genise et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate the layout inside the transmission housing and protect the elements of the transmission from outside debris. (MTD paragraph 48.) Claims 52 and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genise et al. in view of Wenthen (US 2010/0004088). With respect to claims 52 and 63, Genise et al. is silent regarding a power take off. Wenthen teaches of a power take-off location driven by the first or second countershaft (paragraph 28). (Figs. 1-18, paragraphs 28-72.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the structure as described in Wenthen into the invention of Genise et al. with a reasonable expectation of success in order to appropriately transfer power. (Paragraph 28.) Claim 53 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genise et al. in view of Qin et al. (CN 107763153 A; Machine Translation of Description ‘MTD’). With respect to claim 53, Genise et al. discloses a transmission comprising: a) a shaft arrangement including an input shaft (102) configured to couple to a prime mover and an output shaft (103) coaxially aligned (figs. 1-2) with the input shaft; b) a plurality of drive gears supported by the shaft arrangement and including a first drive gear (113), a second drive gear (114), and a third drive gear (115); c) a countershaft arrangement including a first countershaft (116A) and a second countershaft (116B) supporting a plurality of pinion gears (104A, 105A, 106A) intermeshed with the first (113), second (114), and third (115) drive gears; and d) a clutch arrangement (108, 109) including a first clutch assembly (108) and a second clutch assembly (109) operable to lock the first (113), second (114), and third (115) drive gears to the shaft arrangement to selectively provide four gear ratios (paragraphs 14, 20, 24, ) between the input (102) and output (103) shafts. (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 6-63.) Genise et al., as modified, is silent regarding a housing. Qin et al. teaches of a housing (1) enclosing the transmission elements (fig. 1). (Figs. 1-3, MTD paragraphs 29-67.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the housing structure as described in Qin et al. into the invention of Genise et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to protect the elements of the transmission from outside debris. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 54 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. Claims 55-60 are 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 54 includes the limitations of the actuation mechanism (28) comprising: a) a front actuator (30) coupled to a front linkage (34); b) a rear actuator (32) coupled to a rear linkage (36); and c) a clutch assembly; d) wherein the front actuator (30) and the rear actuator (32) are configured to move the clutch arrangement via the front linkage (34) and the rear linkage (36). (Figs. 1-4.) Claim 55 includes the limitations of the input shaft (40) comprises a plurality of first grooves (73); and b) the clutch arrangement comprises a first linkage assembly (70) having a plurality of first shift linkages (71) in the plurality of first grooves (73) formed and within an internal circumference of the first drive gear (48). (Figs. 7-9.) The closest prior art, Genise et al. (WO 2016/077306 A1), does not disclose a front and rear actuator coupled to front and rear linkages, respectively and does not disclose the input shaft having a plurality of grooves and the clutch arrangement having a linkage assembly with shift linkages in the grooves. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited on the PTO-892 form disclose similar features of the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A ENGLISH whose telephone number is (571)270-7014. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Saturday. 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, Jason Shanske can be reached on 571-270-5985. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JAMES A ENGLISH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12673724
WHEEL MODULE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673740
Electric Small-Sized Vehicle
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673528
HYDRAULIC CROSS-LINKED SUSPENSION
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12668295
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR RETAINING A STEERING SHAFT
1y 1m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12655885
STEERING DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+8.2%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1159 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month