DETAILED ACTION
The following is a first action on the merits of application serial no. 18/891265 filed 9/20/2024.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 9/20/24 has 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, the input shaft and output shaft as recited in claim 5; the spur gears and transmission belts as recited in claim 7; the bevel gears as recited in claim 9; load platform having a number of auxiliary load volumes equal to number of independent suspension pairs; and a plane supporting passengers near independent suspension with a lying width substantially equal to a width or extension of the auxiliary volume as recited in claim 12; 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
-Headings are missing from specification per MPEP 608.01 (i.e., Summary of Invention; Brief Description of Drawings; Background of the Invention; etc.).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
-“a transmission system, to set the hub of the wheel in rotation by means of said electric motor (structure)” in claim 5.
-said output shaft is connected to said hub and to said speed reducer by means of respective joining elements made in the form of constant-velocity joints (structure)” in claim 6.
-at least said input shaft and said reducer are provided with spur gears meshed to each other or create a motion transmission by means of transmission belts (structure)” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 1-13 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.
-Claim 1, recites the phrase "in particular for" in line 1. This phrase renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
-Claim 1 recites the limitation "the wheel" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
-Claim 1 recites the limitation “said electric motor developing along its own development axis that is parallel to the rotation axis of the hub, wherein the electric motor develops towards the hub, or along its own development axis perpendicular to the rotation axis of the hub” in lines 5-8. Applicant seems to be attempting to recite an “alternative embodiment”; however, due to the claim reciting that the motor axis “S” is parallel to the rotation axis “R”, which isn’t recited as part of the alternative embodiment, it is unclear as to how the “S” axis can be “parallel” and “perpendicular” to the rotation axis “R”. Examiner is assuming that applicant meant to recite that the motor axis “S” is parallel to the rotation axis “R” or motor axis “S” is perpendicular to the rotation axis “R”. Please clarify or amend accordingly.
-Claims 1, 7 and 9 recite the term “development” when reciting the motor axis “S”, please clarify what this term is referring to (why is the term being used).
-Regarding claim 1, the phrase "for example (i.e.)" in line 11 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
-Regarding claim 4, the phrase "for example (i.e.)" in line 5 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
-Claim 8 recites the limitation “multiple-speed type”, the addition of the word “type” to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. See MPEP § 2173.05(b)(E).
-Claim 12 recites the limitation “with a lying width substantially equal to a width or extension of the auxiliary volume. It is unclear as to what the “lying width” is referring to and therefore, the term “substantially” is unclear based on the “general guidelines” for determining what the term covers in scope being unclear at this time, please clarify and/or amend accordingly.
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.
Note: the use of the term “or” indicates that the limitations preceding or following the term doesn’t need to be met entirely and the recitations are in the form of “alternative” embodiments.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bonera et al 20210309098. As to claim 1, Bonera discloses an independent suspension (1) for vehicles, in particular for transporting people and/or materials ([0003]), comprising: a hub (2) defining a rotation axis (R) of the wheel (3) of the vehicle; an electric motor (4), operatively connected to the hub (2) and configured to set said hub (2) in rotation, said electric motor (4) developing along its own development axis (S) that is parallel to the rotation axis (R) of the hub (as shown in Figures 3), wherein the electric motor (4) develops towards the hub (as shown in Figures 3), or along its own development axis (S) perpendicular to the rotation axis (R) of the hub (alternative embodiment not required to be met by Bonera due to term “or” as stated above); a multi-arm support element (12) operatively connected to the hub (2) and comprising a plurality of arms (12a, 12b), each arm of said plurality of arms being angularly adjustable with respect to said rotation axis of the wheel of the vehicle, i.e. with respect to a connection portion (10) connecting the multi-arm support element with the hub.
As to claim 2, wherein each arm (12) of the plurality of arms has a first end connected to said connection portion (via 11a, 11b) and a second end configured to make a connection to a vehicle chassis (via non referenced portions at ends of 12).
As to claim 3, wherein each arm of the plurality of arms has a first end defining an articulated connection with said connection portion ([0057]) and a second end defining an articulated connection with a vehicle chassis (via non referenced portions at ends of 12).
As to claim 4, wherein said multi-arm support element comprises at least one spring (14) or damper connected or connectable to an upper portion of said connection portion and a shock absorber ([0062]) angularly adjustable with respect to said rotation axis of the wheel i.e. with respect to said connection portion of said multi-arm support element.
As to claim 5, further comprising a transmission system (5), to set the hub (2) of the wheel (3) in rotation by means of said electric motor (4), comprising a speed reducer (6), an input shaft (7a) between the electric motor (4) and the speed reducer and an output shaft (7b) between the speed reducer and the hub.
As to claim 6, wherein said output shaft (7b) is connected to said hub (2) and to said speed reducer by means of respective joining elements (9) made in the form of constant-velocity joints.
As to claim 7, wherein, if said electric motor (4) develops along its own development axis (S) parallel to said rotation axis (R) of the hub (2), at least said input shaft (7a) and said reducer (6) are provided with spur gears meshed to each other or create a motion transmission by means of transmission belts ([0050]).
As to claim 8, wherein said transmission system (5) is of the single-speed or multiple-speed type ([0052]-[0053]).
As to claim 10, Bonera discloses a vehicle for transporting people and/or materials comprising an independent suspension (1) according to one or more of the preceding claims claim1 for each wheel (3) of the vehicle, said independent suspensions (1) coupled to each other having a corridor defining an auxiliary load volume having an extension ([0070]-[0072]).
As to claim 11, further comprising a load platform for loading luggage or other materials having a main load volume and a number of auxiliary load volumes equal to the number of independent suspension pairs present in the vehicle ([0070]-[0073]).
As to claim 12, further comprising a plane configured for supporting passengers that is provided, near said independent suspension (1), with a lying width substantially equal to a width or extension of the auxiliary volume ([0071]-[0078]).
As to claim 13, further comprising a tailgate for loading people and/or materials ([0073]).
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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonera in view of Ruppert et al 5924504 (IDS cited art). As to claim 1, Bonera discloses an independent suspension (1) for vehicles, in particular for transporting people and/or materials ([0003]), comprising: a hub (2) defining a rotation axis (R) of the wheel (3) of the vehicle; an electric motor (4), operatively connected to the hub (2) and configured to set said hub (2) in rotation, said electric motor (4) developing along its own development axis (S) that is parallel to the rotation axis (R) of the hub (as shown in Figures 3), wherein the electric motor (4) develops towards the hub (as shown in Figures 3), a multi-arm support element (12) operatively connected to the hub (2) and comprising a plurality of arms (12a, 12b), each arm of said plurality of arms being angularly adjustable with respect to said rotation axis of the wheel of the vehicle, i.e. with respect to a connection portion (10) connecting the multi-arm support element with the hub. However, Bonera doesn’t disclose the alternative of the electric motor develop along its own development axis (S) perpendicular to the rotation axis (R) of the hub.
Ruppert discloses an independent suspension for vehicles having a hub (28) defining a rotation axis (26) of the wheel (as shown in Figures 1 and 2) of the vehicle; an electric motor (30), operatively connected to the hub and configured to set said hub in rotation, and shows that it is well known in the art to have the electric motor develop along its own development axis (32) perpendicular to the rotation axis (26) of the hub.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Bonera with the electric motor development axis perpendicular alternative in view of Ruppert to reduce the axial length of components within and/or near hub area enhancing compact design and improve torque distribution capabilities to wheel especially in challenging driving conditions.
As to claim 2, Bonera discloses wherein each arm (12) of the plurality of arms has a first end connected to said connection portion (via 11a, 11b) and a second end configured to make a connection to a vehicle chassis (via non referenced portions at ends of 12).
As to claim 3, Bonera discloses wherein each arm of the plurality of arms has a first end defining an articulated connection with said connection portion ([0057]) and a second end defining an articulated connection with a vehicle chassis (via non referenced portions at ends of 12).
As to claim 4, Bonera discloses wherein said multi-arm support element comprises at least one spring (14) or damper connected or connectable to an upper portion of said connection portion and a shock absorber ([0062]) angularly adjustable with respect to said rotation axis of the wheel i.e. with respect to said connection portion of said multi-arm support element.
As to claim 5, Bonera in view of Ruppert discloses further comprising a transmission system (5 in Bonera), to set the hub (2 in Bonera) of the wheel (3 in Bonera) in rotation by means of said electric motor (4 in Bonera and 30 in Ruppert), comprising a speed reducer (6 in Bonera and 34 in Ruppert), an input shaft (7a in Bonera and 42 in Ruppert) between the electric motor and the speed reducer and an output shaft (7b in Bonera and 24 in Ruppert) between the speed reducer and the hub.
As to claim 6, Bonera discloses wherein said output shaft (7b) is connected to said hub (2) and to said speed reducer by means of respective joining elements (9) made in the form of constant-velocity joints.
As to claim 7, Bonera discloses wherein, if said electric motor (4) develops along its own development axis (S) parallel to said rotation axis (R) of the hub (2), at least said input shaft (7a) and said reducer (6) are provided with spur gears meshed to each other or create a motion transmission by means of transmission belts ([0050]).
As to claim 8, Bonera discloses wherein said transmission system (5) is of the single-speed or multiple-speed type ([0052]-[0053]).
As to claim 9, Bonera in view of Ruppert discloses if said electric motor (30 in Ruppert) develops along its own development axis (32 in Ruppert) perpendicular to said rotation axis (26 in Ruppert) of the hub (28 in Ruppert), said input shaft (42 in Ruppert) and said speed reducer (34 in Ruppert) are provided with respective bevel gears (36, 38 in Ruppert) meshed to each other.
As to claim 10, Bonera discloses a vehicle for transporting people and/or materials comprising an independent suspension (1) according to one or more of the preceding claims claim1 for each wheel (3) of the vehicle, said independent suspensions (1) coupled to each other having a corridor defining an auxiliary load volume having an extension ([0070]-[0072]).
As to claim 11, Bonera discloses further comprising a load platform for loading luggage or other materials having a main load volume and a number of auxiliary load volumes equal to the number of independent suspension pairs present in the vehicle ([0070]-[0073]).
As to claim 12, Bonera discloses further comprising a plane configured for supporting passengers that is provided, near said independent suspension (1), with a lying width substantially equal to a width or extension of the auxiliary volume ([0071]-[0078]).
As to claim 13, Bonera discloses further comprising a tailgate for loading people and/or materials ([0073]).
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)(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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by DeCesari et al 20240270038 .
The applied reference has a common inventor and applicant with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference (2/15/2023), it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
As to claim 1, DeCesari discloses an independent suspension (1) for vehicles, in particular for transporting people and/or materials ([0003]), comprising: a hub (2) defining a rotation axis (R) of the wheel (3) of the vehicle; an electric motor (4), operatively connected to the hub (2) and configured to set said hub (2) in rotation, said electric motor (4) developing along its own development axis (S) that is parallel to the rotation axis (R) of the hub (as shown in Figures 1), wherein the electric motor (4) develops towards the hub (as shown in Figures 1), or along its own development axis (S) perpendicular to the rotation axis (R) of the hub (as shown in Figure 4); a multi-arm support element (5) operatively connected to the hub (2) and comprising a plurality of arms (not referenced separately, arms on opposite sides of axis A), each arm of said plurality of arms being angularly adjustable with respect to said rotation axis of the wheel of the vehicle, i.e. with respect to a connection portion (5a) connecting the multi-arm support element with the hub.
As to claim 2, wherein each arm (5) of the plurality of arms has a first end connected to said connection portion and a second end configured to make a connection to a vehicle chassis (as shown in Figure 5).
As to claim 3, wherein each arm of the plurality of arms has a first end defining an articulated connection with said connection portion (via hinge point 5a) and a second end defining an articulated connection with a vehicle chassis (as shown in Figure 5).
As to claim 4, wherein said multi-arm support element comprises at least one spring (6) or damper (7) connected or connectable to an upper portion of said connection portion and a shock absorber ([0050]) angularly adjustable with respect to said rotation axis of the wheel i.e. with respect to said connection portion of said multi-arm support element.
As to claim 5, further comprising a transmission system (8), to set the hub (2) of the wheel (3) in rotation by means of said electric motor (4), comprising a speed reducer (9), an input shaft between the electric motor (4) and the speed reducer and an output shaft between the speed reducer and the hub ([0059]-[0060]).
As to claim 6, wherein said output shaft is connected to said hub (2) and to said speed reducer by means of respective joining elements made in the form of constant-velocity joints ([0059]-[0060]).
As to claim 7, wherein, if said electric motor (4) develops along its own development axis (S) parallel to said rotation axis (R) of the hub (2), at least said input shaft and said reducer are provided with spur gears meshed to each other or create a motion transmission by means of transmission belts ([0064]).
As to claim 8, wherein said transmission system (5) is of the single-speed or multiple-speed type ([0065]).
As to claim 9, if said electric motor develops along its own development axis perpendicular to said rotation axis of the hub (as shown in Figure 4), said input shaft and said speed reducer are provided with respective bevel gears meshed to each other ([0063], [0069]).
As to claim 10, DeCesari discloses a vehicle for transporting people and/or materials comprising an independent suspension (1) according to one or more of the preceding claims claim1 for each wheel (3) of the vehicle, said independent suspensions (1) coupled to each other having a corridor defining an auxiliary load volume having an extension ([0074]-[0081]).
As to claim 11, further comprising a load platform for loading luggage or other materials having a main load volume and a number of auxiliary load volumes equal to the number of independent suspension pairs present in the vehicle ([0080]).
As to claim 12, further comprising a plane configured for supporting passengers that is provided, near said independent suspension (1), with a lying width substantially equal to a width or extension of the auxiliary volume ([0081]).
As to claim 13, further comprising a tailgate for loading people and/or materials ([0082]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-The EPO office action has been considered and the examiner agrees that the prior art cited (EP 0931684 and Ruppert ‘504) does meet the limitations of at least claims 1-9.
-Kurbayashi 11584427 (Figures 1 and 2) and Shiino et al 7866434 (Figure 1) both show independent suspensions and also show that it is well known in the art to provide an electric motor axis perpendicular to a hub axis.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TISHA D LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7093. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30am to 5:00pm.
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, Anna M Momper can be reached at 571-270-5788. 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.
Tdl
/TISHA D LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 June 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights