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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 6/2/26 has been entered.
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) 8-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vornehm (US PG Pub No. 2007/0142141) in view of Houle (US PG Pub No. 2019/0316532)
Regarding claim 8, Vornehm teaches
A vehicle, comprising:
a continuously variable transmission (CVT) comprising a drive belt, a drive member, and a driven member, wherein: (4 figure 1 conical disk pair)
the an output shaft of the power source is operably coupled to the drive member, (10 figure 1)
an output shaft of the CVT is operably coupled to the plurality of ground- engaging members, and (figure 1)
the drive belt operably couples the drive member and the driven member; (38 figure 1)
a sensor that detects at least one of an engine-based parameter or a driveline-based parameter of the vehicle; and (pressure sensor 34, 46 figure 1 OR temperature inferred fro P and S measured directly paragraph 34)
a controller operably coupled to the sensor and configured to:
determine, based on a cumulative value derived from outputs of the sensor (cumulative damage paragraph 36-38)
accumulated over a time period (paragraph 36 and 38 sigma indicates sum over a time period), a remaining life of the drive belt;
compare the remaining life of the drive belt to a threshold; and (paragraph 36 cumulative damage value compared to a predefined critical damage threshold)
in response to the remaining life of the drive belt being below the threshold, change an output of the power source (paragraph 38 system continues to run just as it does but where critical damage cvalue has not or has never yet been reached)
Vornehm does not explicitly teach however Houle teaches
a plurality of ground-engaging members; (70 figure 3)
a power source (44 figure 3 paragraph 48-52) supported by the plurality of ground-engaging members;
to limit function of the power source when it was determined that the remaining life of drive belt is below threshold (paragraph 74 limit power and torque)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vornehm based on the teachings of Houle to teach a plurality of ground-engaging members; a power source supported by the plurality of ground-engaging members; to limit function of the power source when it was determined that the remaining life of drive belt is below threshold. The motivation would be to preserve the transmission (Houle paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 9, Vornehm teaches wherein cumulative value is derived from at least one of a temperature of the drive belt, a speed of the drive belt, or a load on the drive belt, as detected by the sensor over the time period. (paragraph 29, 31, 34 temperature).
Regarding clam 10, Vornehm does not explicitly teach however Houle teaches wherein limiting the function of the power source comprises limiting a speed of the vehicle (paragraph 74 power = torque * speed and limit power = limit speed also)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vornehm based on the teachings of Houle to teach wherein limiting the function of the power source comprises limiting a speed of the vehicle. The motivation would be to preserve the transmission (Houle paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 11, Vornehm does not explicitly teach however Houle teaches wherein limiting the function of the power source comprises limiting an output of the power source of the vehicle. (paragraph 74)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vornehm based on the teachings of Houle to teach wherein limiting the function of the power source comprises limiting an output of the power source of the vehicle. The motivation would be to preserve the transmission (Houle paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 12, Vornehm does not explicitly teach however Houle teaches wherein the limited output of the power source comprises a limit of at least one of an engine speed or an engine torque of the power source. (paragraph 74)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vornehm based on the teachings of Houle wherein the limited output of the power source comprises a limit of at least one of an engine speed or an engine torque of the power source. The motivation would be to preserve the transmission (Houle paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 13, Vornehm teaches wherein the controller is further configured to:
provide, via a display of the vehicle, an indication that the remaining life of the belt is below the threshold. (74 figure 2 paragraph 76)
Regarding claim 14, Vornehm teaches wherein the indication comprises an audio, textual, or graphical indicator. (74 figure 2 paragraph 76)
Regarding claim 15, Vornehm teaches wherein the indication comprises at least one of a temperature of the drive belt, an estimated number of miles to drive belt failure, a percentage of drive belt life remaining, or a percentage of drive belt life used. (paragraph 28, 30, 31-36)
Regarding claim 16, Vornehm teaches to provide the indication (74 figure 2)
Vornehm does not explicitly teach however Houle teaches wherein the controller is configured to limiting the function of the power source. (paragraph 74-76)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vornehm based on the teachings of Houle to teach wherein the controller is configured to limiting the function of the power source. The motivation would be to preserve the transmission (Houle paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 17, Vornehm does not explicitly teach however Houle teaches wherein the engine-based parameter is related to at least one of an engine load signal, an engine torque signal, a transmission speed signal, and an engine power signal. (paragraph 74).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vornehm based on the teachings of Houle to teach wherein the engine-based parameter is related to at least one of an engine load signal, an engine torque signal, a transmission speed signal, and an engine power signal. The motivation would be to preserve the transmission (Houle paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 18, Vornehm does not explicitly teach however Houle teaches wherein the driveline-based parameter is related to at least one of a vehicle speed signal, an engine speed signal, and a wheel speed signal (paragraph 74).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vornehm based on the teachings of Houle to teach wherein the driveline-based parameter is related to at least one of a vehicle speed signal, an engine speed signal, and a wheel speed signal. The motivation would be to preserve the transmission (Houle paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 19-27, see the rejection of claim 8-11, 13, 15-18 as the limitations are substantially similar.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 8 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C. JIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9898. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM.
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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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.
/GEORGE C JIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights