Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/908,919

WIND TURBINE GEARBOX AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A WIND TURBINE GEARBOX

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 08, 2024
Examiner
JOHNSON, PHILLIP A
Art Unit
3617
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Miba Gleitlager Austria GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1083 granted / 1328 resolved
+29.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
1347
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
34.4%
-5.6% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
30.5%
-9.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1328 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . 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 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11644012. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the present application is generic to or fully encompasses claim 1 of USP 11644012. Claim 1 – 18908919: A wind turbine gearbox having at least one gear which is mounted on an axle, wherein a sliding surface is arranged between the gear and the axle or between the axle and an axle holder, wherein the sliding surface is arranged on at least one layer of a deposition welded material made of a sliding bearing material, and wherein the layer of the deposition welded material is applied directly to an outer shell surface of the axle. Claim 1 – USP 11644012: A wind turbine gearbox having at least one gear which is mounted on an axle, wherein a sliding surface is arranged between the gear and the axle or between the axle and an axle holder, wherein the sliding surface is arranged on at least one layer of a deposition welded material made of a sliding bearing material, wherein the layer of the deposition welded material is applied directly to an outer shell surface of the axle, and wherein an offset is arranged on the axle and the layer of the deposition welded material is applied directly to the end face of the offset. Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11644012. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the present application is generic to or fully encompasses claim 2 of USP 11644012. Claim 4 - 18908919: The wind turbine gearbox according to claim 1, wherein the gear is designed as a planetary gear. Claim 2 – 11644012: The wind turbine gearbox according to claim 1, wherein the gear is designed as a planetary gear. Claim 5 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 11644012. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 5 of the present application is generic to or fully encompasses claim 3 of USP 11644012. Claim 5 - 18908919: The wind turbine gearbox according to claim 1, wherein the deposition welded material consists of or comprises a material selected from a group comprising aluminum base alloys, tin base alloys, bronze base alloys, brass base alloys. Claim 3 – 11644012: The wind turbine gearbox according to claim 1, wherein the deposition welded material consists of or comprises a material selected from a group comprising aluminum base alloys, tin base alloys, bronze base alloys, brass base alloys. Claim 6 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 18908919. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 6 of the present application is generic to or fully encompasses claim 4 of USP 11644012. Claim 6 – 18908919: The wind turbine gearbox according to claim 1, wherein the deposition welded material consists of or comprises a material which comprises at least two materials selected from a group comprising aluminum, tin, bronze, brass. Claim 4 – 11644012: The wind turbine gearbox according to claim 1, wherein the deposition welded material consists of or comprises a material which comprises at least two materials selected from a group comprising aluminum, tin, bronze, brass. Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 11644012. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 7 of the present application is generic to or fully encompasses claim 5 of USP 11644012. Claim 7 – 18908919: A wind turbine having a rotor and a generator, wherein a wind turbine gearbox, which is operatively connected to the rotor and the generator is arranged between the rotor and the generator, wherein the wind turbine gearbox is designed according to claim 1. Claim 5 – 11644012: A wind turbine having a rotor and a generator, wherein a wind turbine gearbox, which is operatively connected to the rotor and the generator is arranged between the rotor and the generator, wherein the wind turbine gearbox is designed according to claim 1. Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11644012. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 8 of the present application is generic to or fully encompasses claim 15 of USP 11644012. Claim 8 – 18908919: A method for producing a wind turbine gearbox, having at least one gear which is mounted on an axle, wherein a sliding surface is arranged between the gear and the axle, wherein the method comprises the following steps: providing the axle; deposition welding of a sliding bearing material and with that, depositing a layer of a deposition welded material directly onto the axle; forming the sliding surface on the layer. Claim 15 – 11644012: A method for producing a wind turbine gearbox having at least one gear which is mounted on an axle, wherein a sliding surface is arranged between the gear and the axle, wherein the method comprises the following steps: providing the gear or the axle or a sliding bearing bushing; deposition welding of a sliding bearing material and with that, depositing a layer of a deposition welded material directly onto the gear or the axle or a sliding bearing; forming the sliding surface on the layer; wherein when deposition welding, the layer is applied having a raw layer thickness of between 1 mm and 5 mm, and wherein the layer of the deposition welded material is removed, in a subsequent processing step by machining, to a layer thickness of between 0.5 mm and 1.5 mm. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9 – 12 and 16 – 21 are allowed. Claims 3 and 13 – 15 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: The prior art of record, including Dinter et al. USPGPUB 20120108380 and Mittendorf et al USPGPUB 20090062159, taken as a whole neither teaches nor makes obvious the claimed combination of a wind turbine gearbox as set forth in claim(s) 9 and 10. With respect to claim 9, Dinter discloses a wind turbine gearbox including a planetary gear arrangement (see, e.g., Fig. 1) and further discloses, in Fig. 2, an embodiment in which a planet gear is rotatably supported on an axle via a sliding bearing (108). Mittendorf discloses sliding bearing interfaces and coating layers applied to bearing components (see, e.g., Figs. 1–3). However, even in view of Dinter’s sliding bearing embodiment (Fig. 2; sliding bearing 108 between the gear and the axle) and Mittendorf’s coated bearing layers, neither reference teaches or suggests a sliding surface (26) formed on a layer (25) of deposition welded material directly applied to a gearbox structural component, such as the axle (19), gear (14), or axle holder (24), as shown, for example, in Figs. 3 and 9 of the present application. In particular: Dinter’s sliding bearing (108) is a separate bearing element or bushing arranged between the gear and axle, rather than a deposition welded layer integrated directly onto the component surface; and Mittendorf’s coating layers (Figs. 1–3) are applied by conventional coating techniques and are not disclosed as being formed by deposition welding, nor as forming the bearing interface directly on structural gearbox components in a planetary gear arrangement. Accordingly, the combination of Dinter and Mittendorf fails to teach or suggest the claimed configuration in which the sliding surface (26) is defined by a deposition welded layer (25) directly on the component forming the bearing interface. With respect to claim 10, while Mittendorf may disclose bearing or coating materials suitable for sliding applications, neither Dinter nor Mittendorf teaches or suggests that a deposition welded layer (25) forming the sliding surface consists of or comprises materials selected from aluminum base alloys, tin base alloys, bronze base alloys, or brass base alloys, nor do they teach such materials in the context of a deposition-welded sliding layer integrated into gearbox components. Accordingly, the claimed combinations of claims 9 and 10 represent a non-obvious advance over the prior art. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP A JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5216. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm. 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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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. /PHILLIP A JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 08, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601374
ROLLING BEARING AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601376
ROLLING BEARING AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590607
BEARING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590604
SLIDING COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584523
ROLLING BEARING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1328 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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