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 Species I drawn to Fig. 3-5 and 7 in the reply filed on 12/16/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim 28 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/16/2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 8-, 11-13, 16, AND 25-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Montgomery et al. (US 11,753,987; hereinafter Montgomery).
Regarding claim 1, Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) discloses a driven turbocharger (100) for an engine system comprising: a turbo shaft (104); a compressor (106) connected to a first location on said turbo shaft (104); a turbine (108) connected to a second location on said turbo shaft (104); a two-piece sun race mounted on said turbo shaft (104) comprising: a first sun race piece (887) that mates with a shaft surface A of said turbo shaft (104) via a precision fit; a second sun race piece (889) that mates with a shaft surface B of said turbo shaft (104) via a precision fit, wherein said shaft surface B of said turbo shaft (104) is of larger diameter than said shaft surface A of said turbo shaft (104) such that said second sun race piece (889) clears said shaft surface A of said turbo shaft (104) without interference during assembly; a traction drive (802) in contact with a first race traction surface (888) and a second race traction surface (890) of said two-piece sun race that transfers torque to and from said turbo shaft (104).
Regarding claim 2, Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1 where Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses that said first race traction surface (888) is formed on said first sun race piece (887) and said second race traction surface (890) is formed on said second sun race piece (889).
Regarding claim 5, Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1 where Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses that said first race traction surface (888) and said second race traction surface (890) are shaped such that thrust forces on said turbo shaft are capable of being absorbed by said traction drive (Montgomery was interpreted as disclosing this limitation since the tractions surfaces are angled).
Regarding claim 8, Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1 wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses a shoulder formed on said turbo shaft (104) that locates said first sun race piece (887) axially on said turbo shaft (104). Refer to Fig. I below.
PNG
media_image1.png
474
639
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. I. Montgomery, fig. 8 (Annotated)
Regarding claim 9, Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1 wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses a second shoulder formed on said turbo shaft (104) that locates said second sun race piece (889) axially on said turbo shaft (104). Refer to Fig. I above.
Regarding claim 11, Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1 wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses a sleeve located between said first sun race piece (887) and said second sun race piece (889) that increases the effective stiffness (since it adds to the thickness of the shaft) of said turbo shaft (104). Refer to Fig. I above.
Regarding claim 12, Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) discloses a method of assembling a rotating assembly for a driven turbocharger (100) comprising: forming a shaft surface A and a shaft surface B on a turbo shaft (104) wherein said shaft surface B of said turbo shaft (104 - when coupled with the sleeve of 887) is of larger diameter than said shaft surface A of said turbo shaft (104); inserting a second sun race piece (889) of a two-piece sun race (886) without interference over said shaft surface A of said turbo shaft (104); mating said second sun race piece (889) of said two-piece sun race (886) to said shaft surface B of said turbo shaft (104) via a precision fit; mating a first sun race piece (887) of said two-piece sun race (886) to said shaft surface A of said turbo shaft (104) via a precision fit.
Regarding claim 13, Montgomery discloses the method of claim 12, wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses forming a first race traction surface (888) on said first sun race piece (887); forming a second race traction surface (890) on said second sun race piece (889); mating a traction drive (802) to said first race traction surface (888) and said second race traction surface (890).
Regarding claim 16, Montgomery discloses the method of claim 13, wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses that said first race traction surface (888) and said second race traction surface (890) are shaped such that thrust forces on said turbo shaft (104) are absorbed by said traction drive (802 - Montgomery was interpreted as disclosing this limitation since the tractions surfaces are angled).
Regarding claim 25, Montgomery discloses the method of claim 12, wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses forming a shoulder on said turbo shaft (104) that locates said first sun race piece (887). Refer to Fig. I above.
Regarding claim 26, Montgomery discloses the method of claim 12, wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses forming a second shoulder on said turbo shaft (104) that locates said second sun race piece (889). Refer to Fig. I above.
Regarding claim 27, Montgomery discloses the method of claim 13, wherein Montgomery (Fig. 1 and 8) further discloses that said first sun race piece (887) is installed on said turbo shaft (104) after planet rollers (822) of a traction drive (802) of said driven turbocharger (100) are arranged around said turbo shaft (104) during assembly of said traction drive (802).
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) 6-7 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Montgomery et al. (US 11,753,987; hereinafter Montgomery) in view of Berger et al. (US 11,629,614; hereinafter Berger).
Regarding claim 6, Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1 but fails to disclose a slinger formed adjacent to said first race traction surface.
Berger (Col. 7, lines 8-15) teaches that slingers can be formed on the shaft and serve to reduce oil leakage through the shaft passage in the bearing housing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Montgomery by adding a slinger near the first race traction surface, as taught by Berger, in order to produce the predictable result of reduce oil leakage through the traction drive.
Regarding claim 7, Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1 but fails to disclose a slinger formed adjacent to said second race traction surface.
Berger (Col. 7, lines 8-15) teaches that slingers can be formed on the shaft and serve to reduce oil leakage through the shaft passage in the bearing housing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Montgomery by adding a slinger near the second race traction surface, as taught by Berger, in order to produce the predictable result of reduce oil leakage through the traction drive.
Regarding claim 17, Montgomery discloses the method of claim 13, but fails to disclose forming a slinger adjacent to said first race traction surface.
Berger (Col. 7, lines 8-15) teaches that slingers can be formed on the shaft and serve to reduce oil leakage through the shaft passage in the bearing housing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Montgomery by adding a slinger near the first race traction surface, as taught by Berger, in order to produce the predictable result of reduce oil leakage through the traction drive.
Regarding claim 18, Montgomery discloses the method of claim 13, but fails to disclose forming a slinger adjacent to said second race traction surface.
Berger (Col. 7, lines 8-15) teaches that slingers can be formed on the shaft and serve to reduce oil leakage through the shaft passage in the bearing housing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Montgomery by adding a slinger near the second race traction surface, as taught by Berger, in order to produce the predictable result of reduce oil leakage through the traction drive.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 10, 14-15, 19-24 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:
Regarding claim 3:
Closest prior art: Montgomery et al. (US 11,753,987; hereinafter Montgomery)
Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1.
The closest prior art fails to disclose or suggest that said first race traction surface and said second race traction surface are formed on said first sun race piece.
Regarding claim 4:
Closest prior art: Montgomery et al. (US 11,753,987; hereinafter Montgomery)
Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 1.
The closest prior art fails to disclose or suggest that said first race traction surface and said second race traction surface are formed on said second sun race piece.
Regarding claim 10:
Closest prior art: Montgomery et al. (US 11,753,987; hereinafter Montgomery)
Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 2.
The closest prior art fails to disclose or suggest that said first race traction surface on said first sun race piece is angled inwardly away from said compressor.
Regarding claim 14:
Closest prior art: Montgomery et al. (US 11,753,987; hereinafter Montgomery)
Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 12.
The closest prior art fails to disclose or suggest forming a first race traction surface and a second race traction surface on said first sun race piece; mating a traction drive to said first race traction surface and said second race traction surface.
Claims 19-21 are objected to for depending upon claim 14.
Regarding claim 15:
Closest prior art: Montgomery et al. (US 11,753,987; hereinafter Montgomery)
Montgomery discloses the driven turbocharger of claim 12.
The closest prior art fails to disclose or suggest forming a first race traction surface and a second race traction surface on said second sun race piece; mating a traction drive to said first race traction surface and said second race traction surface.
Claims 22-24 are objected to for depending upon claim 15.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tanaka et al. (JP 2014196825 A) discloses a roller reduction gear which includes two sun roller elements.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE M CHRISTENSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3275. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 PM.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at 571-270-3508. 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.
/Danielle M. Christensen/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights