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 .
Information Disclosure Statements
Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statements, filed Oct. 24, 2024 and Nov. 5, 2024 are acknowledged and have been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore,
(a) the drive shaft connected to the gear box to connect to the “four wheel and tire assemblies” (see, at least, claim 1; note that the drive shaft as illustrated by applicant only connects to the forward wheel and tire assemblies through the forward differential, see figure 6), and
(b) the steering assembly extending forward of the second differential (see, at least, claim 5) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 12, 14 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 12, line 3, it appears as though “extends is located” should be either –extends-- or –is located--; in claim 14, line 4, it appears as though “saddle portion” should be –saddle support—for agreement with claim 14, line 2; in claim 20, lines 36-37, “the opening” lacks a clear antecedent basis (although it appears as though this may be a reference to a top of the cavity “that opens upwardly”). Appropriate correction is required.
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 3 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. In claim 3, lines 5-7, the recitation of the first differential being supported at the rear end of the chassis appears contradictory to the recitation in claim 3, lines 7-8, which recites the first differential being supported on the chassis at a front end. For purposes of interpretation the examiner is interpreting this as meaning that one of the differentials is supported at the rear end of the chassis and the other is supported at the front end; the context of the other claims implies that the forward differential is the second differential.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 (i.e., the limitations presented in claims 1, 7 and 8) of U.S. Patent No. 12,059,959. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because, with the exception of the recitation of a gearbox, the broader genus-type limitations recited in the instant application claims are met by the narrower species-type limitations of the claim in the issued Patent. As regards the provision of a gearbox, the material presented in claim 8 of the ‘959 patent lacks the specific teaching of the motor being connected to a gearbox which connects to the four wheel and tire assemblies. It is, however, notoriously well known to provide an electric motor with a step-down gearing for driving a load in order to allow the motor to operate at a higher rotational speed (and in a generally higher efficiency speed region) while allowing the load to be driven at a normal speed appropriate to the load (in this case, for moving the vehicle).Resultantly, it 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 to provide the arrangement of claim 8 of U.S. Patent 12,059,959 with a gearbox connecting the motor to the drive wheels to allow the motor to operate at a higher operating speed than the wheels are driven at, to facilitate running the motor in a higher-efficiency speed range.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 (i.e., the limitations presented in claims 1, 15, 16 and 17) of U.S. Patent No. 11,766,929. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the broader genus-type limitations recited in the instant application claims are met by the narrower species-type limitations of the claim in the issued Patent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 9-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crain et al. (US 2010/0314182). Crain et al. teach an ATV (100) including an electric drive system, the vehicle and drive system including an electric motor (370), a gearbox (372, figure 10A), four wheel and tire assemblies (102, 104, 106), at least one battery (318, 304A, 304B), a control module (308, 552, 554), and a throttle device (632, 634, 636), the electric motor electrically connected to and configured to receive at least a first signal from the control module (connections 350; ¶0089); the control module electrically connected to and configured to receive a charge from the battery (connections B+, B-); the throttle device being electrically connected to, and configured to send a further signal to the control module (connection illustrated in schematic, figure 15), the electric motor being rotationally connected to the gearbox (motor output connected to gear 382; ¶0090) and at least one drive shaft (306) connected to the gear box to connect the gearbox to tire and wheel assemblies; including first and second differentials (376, 400), each connected to a respective forward and rearward pair of wheel and tire assemblies, the gearbox rotationally coupled to the first and second differentials (driving pinion 390, see ¶0090); the vehicle including a chassis (150 in general) with the rear chassis end supporting the rear wheel pair, and a front end supporting the front wheel pair; the chassis including at least two frame rails (220, 222, 230) with the electric motor, gearbox and rear differential being mounted between the frame rails (e.g., 230) on the chassis at a rear end, the front differential being supported on the chassis at the front end thereof on the frame rails (e.g., 222); the vehicle further including a steering assembly (134) which is understood to be connected to the forward wheel pair, the forward differential supported on the chassis near the forward wheel pair; the arrangement including forward and rearward axle pairs (530A, 530B, 532A, 532B; ¶¶0091, 0125) connecting each of the wheels to one of the differentials, the axles extending outwardly from the differentials, the electric motor output being connected to a drive gear (382) in the gear box, the gearbox being supported forward of the motor (figure 10A) and coupled to the motor; the rear differential being located below the electric motor; the rear differential being integrated with the gearbox (figure 10A) and extending rearward therefrom; the rear differential being rotationally connected with the output of the gearbox (at pinion 390; note ¶0090) coupled to the rear wheel and tire assemblies, the electric motor and gearbox being located close to the rear tire and wheel assemblies, the at least one drive shaft (306) extending towards the forward pair of wheel and tire assemblies, the drive shaft extending between the gearbox (e.g., gearbox output shaft 378) and the forward wheel and tire assembly pair; the electric motor located above the rear differential and extending parallel to the rear differential (as broadly claimed, longitudinal axis of the motor extends forwardly and rearwardly, a horizontal diametric axis of the rear differential extends forwardly and rearwardly in parallel, spaced there-below), the gearbox extends and/or is located on the front side of the electric motor and the first differential; the electric motor being mounted higher than the pair of drive axles (e.g., connected to 374) for the rear tire and wheel assemblies; the chassis further including a saddle support element (cross member 282), located between the forward and rearward tire and wheel assemblies, the steering assembly (134) being located forward of the saddle support portion, at least one battery being supported within the chassis between the saddle support and the steering assembly (figure 5A), there being a space within the chassis to accommodate at least one battery.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 4, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crain et al. (cited above).
As regards claim 4, the reference to Crain et al. teaches the provision of a steering device, but does not expressly teach that it is connected to the forward pair of wheel and tire assemblies. Initially, Crain et al. expressly identify controls 134 as operative to achieve steering (¶0079: “Controls 134 may include controls for steering, acceleration and braking.”) and in view of the proximity of the controls to the front of the vehicle, and in view of it being common to provide forward wheels of a vehicle as being steerable, it 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 to provide the steering operator control taught by Crain as actually being connected to allow the forward wheel and tire assemblies to be steered, for the very well-known purpose of allowing the vehicle to be maneuvered by an operator. Note that such a connection, if provided, would be adjacent the differential, e.g., to the right and/or left of the differential.
As regards claim 7, while Crain et al. teach the arrangement including forward and rearward axle pairs (530A, 530B, 532A, 532B; ¶¶0091, 0125) connecting each of the wheels to one of the differentials, the axles extending outwardly from the differentials, the reference lacks a teaching of the connection of the respective axles to the differentials by CV joints. CV joints are old and well known in the manufacture of vehicles for allowing relative angular motion between driving or driven components and a drive shaft, particularly wheels, and are used to allow power transfer to be achieved across an angularly variable configuration (for example, suspended wheels) Further, Crain et al. expressly teach a suspension arrangement including ‘A’ arms (154, 162) and shocks (156, 164) forming suspension systems which allow relative motion of the wheel and tire assemblies (see, e.g., ¶0080). It 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 to provide the axle pairs taught by Crain et al. as connected to the respective differentials with CV joints for the purpose of allowing motion of the wheel and tire assemblies in an up and down direction with respect to the chassis, so that the taught suspension structures can operate. Note that since Crain et al. has forward and rearward wheels suspended, and forward and rearward wheels driven, the practical embodiment of a vehicle taught by Crain et al. would necessarily have some structure that allows relative angular motion of the axle pairs, otherwise it would not be possible for the wheels to be suspended and driven as disclosed.
As regards claim 8, while Crain et al. teach the electric motor output being connected to a drive gear (382) in the gear box, the reference does not expressly teach that the connection is via a motor shaft, at least a part of which extends in the gear box. To the extent that a rotary motor commonly includes a drive shaft provided at its center of rotation, and to the extent that Crain et al. expressly teach that the motor (370) drives the gear 382 in the gearbox, it 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 to provide the motor shaft as extending into the gearbox (for example connected to or integral with the armature in the motor and connected to the gear 382 in the gear box), for the purpose of allowing the rotary force developed by the motor to be conveyed to the gearing in the gearbox with the most common known means of force transfer for a rotary motor (i.e., a drive shaft), thus facilitating the construction of the drive connection using commonly known and readily available components.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crain et al. in view of Takamoto et al. (US 2003/0051937). The reference to Crain et al. is discussed above, and while teaching a steering assembly, is not particular concerning the steering assembly as extending forward of the front differential. Takamoto et al. teach that in a four-wheel driven and at least front-wheel steered vehicle, that it is known to provide a steering system (40 in general, handle 42, column 44, support elements 52, 54, 56, 58, 80, 82, 92) wherein the assembly extends forwardly of the front differential (e.g., at least forward ends of the support elements including assembly reservoir 92, see figure 1; front differential shown in phantom). It 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 to provide the steering control taught by Crain et al. as including elements forward of the front differential as suggested by Takamoto et al., for the purpose of distributing the steering elements longitudinally forward of the frame so as to not crowd the area proximate the differential, resultantly allowing enhanced access to the differential for inspection, repair, maintenance and/or replacement.
Claim(s) 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crain et al. in view of Matsuda (US 2013/0264134).
The reference to Crain et al. is discussed above (see the section under 35 USC §102).
With respect to claim 20 as treated herein and the limitation of the motor shaft extending into the gearbox, while Crain et al. teach the electric motor output being connected to a drive gear (382) in the gear box, the reference does not expressly teach that the connection is via a motor shaft, at least a part of which extends in the gear box. To the extent that a rotary motor commonly includes a drive shaft provided at its center of rotation, and to the extent that Crain et al. expressly teach that the motor (370) drives the gear 382 in the gearbox, it 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 to provide the motor shaft as extending into the gearbox (for example connected to or integral with the armature in the motor and connected to the gear 382 in the gear box), for the purpose of allowing the rotary force developed by the motor to be conveyed to the gearing in the gearbox with the most common known means of force transfer for a rotary motor (i.e., a drive shaft), thus facilitating the construction of the drive connection using commonly known and readily available components.
The reference to Crain et al., while teaching a space within the chassis to accommodate at least one battery does not expressly teach the space having an opening upward, the battery removable through the upward opening with at least one handle. Matsuda teaches that in a vehicle (1) having a chassis (overall 8, chassis frame elements 80) and accommodating at least one battery (50, 51), it is known to provide the battery as being upwardly removable (figures 3(a), 3(b)), the battery removable with at least one handle (54). It 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 to provide at least one battery in the vehicle taught initially by Crain as being upwardly removable through an upward opening in the chassis, such as taught by Matsuda, for the purpose of providing additional battery capacity (e.g., centrally, between laterally spaced battery elements 318)) and allowing the additional battery to be accessed for removal, installation, repair or maintenance without requiring the laterally spaced battery elements to be removed.
As further regards claim 18, the modifying reference to Matsuda lacks a particular teaching that the battery handle is pivotally attached to the battery. Pivotal access handles are well known in numerous art areas, seeing utility in allowing a more compact profile when not in use, and it 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 to provide the handle as taught by Matsuda as being pivotally connected to the battery for the purpose of allowing the handle to be pivoted to a non-use position when not being employed to remove or install the battery, thus reducing the vertical profile of the battery and conserving space when the handle is not in use.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Huber provides documentary evidence concerning the use of an electric motor at a higher operating speed (and then driving a load through a step-down gearing) allows efficient operation (see col. 4, lines 41-47); Fini, Jr and Burke et al. teach arrangements with at least a portion of a steering mechanism being forwardly located with respect to a forward axle drive; Morgan et al. teach an electric off-road vehicle with drive structure and battery elements; Monfette et al. teach an electric off road vehicle with rear and front drive, half-shaft axles and employing well-known CV and universal joints to connect the half-shaft axles.
Any inquiry specifically concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to F. Vanaman whose telephone number is 571-272-6701.
In the event that the examiner cannot be reached, the examiner’s supervisor, Paul Dickson, may be reached at (571) 272-7742.
Any inquiries of a general nature or relating to the status of this application may be made through 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
A response to this action should be mailed to:
Mail Stop ______
Commissioner for Patents
P. O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450,
Or faxed to:
PTO Central Fax: 571-273-8300
F. VANAMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3614
/FRANK B VANAMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614