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 Claims 1-6, 10-14, 16, & 19-20, in the reply filed on 04/28/2025 is acknowledged.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 10-14, 16, & 19-20 of U.S. Application No. 18/916889 filed on 11/24/2025 have been examined.
Office Action is in response to the Applicant's amendments and remarks filed11/24/2025. Claims 1, 5-6, & 10-13, are presently amended, and Claim 4 is cancelled. Claims 1-3, 5-6, 10-14, 16, & 19-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
In regards to the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant’s argues that the prior art does not disclose the limitation “a motor controller configured or programmed to control the motor rotation speed in response to an operation on the accelerator operation tool and to perform a motor restraining control to restrict an output from the motor in response to the accelerator operation tool being operated after the at least one shift operation tool is operated with the motor rotation speed being equal to or less than a predetermined first rotation speed”. Applicant further argues on page. 8 of the Remarks, “In the system of Asakuma, the torque restriction control is not performed when a traveling direction of the vehicle is correctly set when the vehicle starts to travel after parking, i.e., when the accelerator opening increases with the vehicle set in a traveling direction opposite to the traveling direction of vehicle from immediately before the vehicle stopped. In the system of Asakuma, whether or not the torque restriction control is performed is based on whether or not the traveling direction of the vehicle is correctly set. Asakuma does not teach or suggest that the torque restriction control is performed in response to an accelerator operation tool being operated after the at least one shift operation tool is operated, i.e., when the shift operation tool and the accelerator operation tool are operated in an inappropriate procedure (in a wrong order) at the time of starting traveling/working. In contrast to Asakuma, see, for example, paragraphs[0087]-[0091] of Applicant's specification and Fig. 6 of Applicant's drawings.”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. Asakuma is incorporated to teach the idea of motor restraining control while the vehicle has shifted the operation tool, specifically while parking or in reverse. Asakuma teaches when starting after the vehicle stops, the traveling direction of the transmission is switched and torque limiting control that limits the engine torque and limits the driving torque of the vehicle when the accelerator opening increases in the same state as immediately before the vehicle stops, which is interpreted as a situation when the pedal is hit by mistake. When the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake as a brake pedal during deceleration backward, or immediately before the vehicle stops because the road is congested. When the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake while decelerating, the vehicle driving torque is limited by torque limit control, thereby preventing the vehicle from suddenly jerking (see at least Asakuma, para. 0026-0029]). Further the claim only requires after the shift operation tool is operated, Asakuma teaches that when the vehicle is started after being stopped and the transmission is switched, further being switched to reverse meets the requirement of the claim. The threshold of the motor rotation being equal to or less than a predetermined first rotation speed is also taught by Asakuma, which shows the determination after the shift tool is operated and in reverse, the torque control is initiated (see at least Asakuma, para. [0039]). In view of the arguments above the 103 rejection is maintained.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, & 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0309442A1 (“Ogura”), in view of JP 2011/122607A (“Asakuma”).
As per claim 1 Ogura discloses
An electric work vehicle, comprising:
a motor to drive at least either a travel device or a work device (see at least Ogura, para. [0028]: Although the following description explains the electric work vehicle as being equipped with wheels as a travelling device driven by a travel motor and as traveling by driving of the wheels, it is also possible that the travelling device is a crawler or the like. & para. [0116]);
at least one shift operation tool to shift a rotational power to drive the travel device or the work device (see at least Ogura, para. [0032]: The grip section 24 is grasped and operated by the driver. Each of the operation levers 22 and 23 is pivotable about an axis along the left-right direction at the lower end section. Regarding each of the operation levers 22 and 23, in a case of being tilted toward the front side with respect to the N-position, which is the neutral position in the vicinity of the upright position, the motor 30 (or 31) on the same side as the operation lever 22 (or 23) is controlled to be driven at a target rotational frequency per unit time (sec−1) that is a target rotational speed corresponding to forward traveling.);
an accelerator operation tool to raise and lower a motor rotation speed of the motor (see at least Ogura, para. [0032]: In the main frame 20, two guide panels 26 and 27 are fixed on left and right sides of the driver's seat 21, and the left and right operation levers 22 and 23 are supported on the main frame 20 so as to protrude upward from the two guide panels 26 and 27, respectively. The left operation lever 22corresponds to an acceleration controller that directs acceleration of the left travel motor 30, and the right operation lever 23 corresponds to an acceleration controller that controls acceleration of the right travel motor 31.).
However Ogura does not explicitly disclose
a motor controller configured or programmed to control the motor rotation speed in response to an operation on the accelerator operation tool and to perform a motor restraining control to restrict an output from the motor in response to the accelerator operation tool being operated after the at least one shift operation tool is operated with the motor rotation speed being equal to or less than a predetermined first rotation speed.
Asakuma teaches
a motor controller configured or programmed to control the motor rotation speed in response to an operation on the accelerator operation tool and to perform a motor restraining control to restrict an output from the motor in response to the accelerator operation tool being operated after the at least one shift operation tool is operated with the motor rotation speed being equal to or less than a predetermined first rotation speed (see at least Asakuma, para. [0026-0029]: As a countermeasure against this, the ECU 22 executes torque limit control routines shown in FIGS. 3 and 4 to be described later, thereby functioning as torque limit control means. When starting after the vehicle stops, the traveling direction of the transmission 12 is switched. Torque limiting control that limits the engine torque (output torque of the engine 11) and limits the driving torque of the vehicle (torque transmitted to the wheels 15) when the accelerator opening increases in the same state as immediately before the vehicle stops… Further, torque limit control is also executed when the accelerator opening increases during deceleration immediately before the vehicle stops. Thus, for example, when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake as a brake pedal during deceleration immediately before the vehicle enters the parking space forward or backward, or immediately before the vehicle stops because the road is congested. When the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake while decelerating, the vehicle driving torque is limited by torque limit control, thereby preventing the vehicle from suddenly starting…para. [0071]: In the above embodiment, the present invention is applied to a vehicle using only an engine as a power source. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and an electric vehicle using only a motor as a power source or a hybrid using both an engine and a motor as a power source. The present invention can also be applied to a car.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of a motor controller configured or programmed to control the motor rotation speed in response to an operation on the accelerator operation tool and to perform a motor restraining control to restrict an output from the motor in response to the accelerator operation tool being operated after the at least one shift operation tool is operated with the motor rotation speed being equal to or less than a predetermined first rotation speed of Asakuma, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve safety while satisfying the demand for cost reduction (see at least Asakuma, para. [0007]).
As per claim 2 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrict an increase in the motor rotation speed.
Asakuma teaches
wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrict an increase in the motor rotation speed (see at least Asakuma, para. [0026-0029]: As a countermeasure against this, the ECU 22 executes torque limit control routines shown in FIGS. 3 and 4 to be described later, thereby functioning as torque limit control means. When starting after the vehicle stops, the traveling direction of the transmission 12 is switched. Torque limiting control that limits the engine torque (output torque of the engine 11) and limits the driving torque of the vehicle (torque transmitted to the wheels 15) when the accelerator opening increases in the same state as immediately before the vehicle stops… Further, torque limit control is also executed when the accelerator opening increases during deceleration immediately before the vehicle stops. Thus, for example, when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake as a brake pedal during deceleration immediately before the vehicle enters the parking space forward or backward, or immediately before the vehicle stops because the road is congested. When the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake while decelerating, the vehicle driving torque is limited by torque limit control, thereby preventing the vehicle from suddenly starting…para. [0071]: In the above embodiment, the present invention is applied to a vehicle using only an engine as a power source. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and an electric vehicle using only a motor as a power source or a hybrid using both an engine and a motor as a power source. The present invention can also be applied to a car.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrict an increase in the motor rotation speed of Asakuma, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve safety while satisfying the demand for cost reduction (see at least Asakuma, para. [0007]).
As per claim 3 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrict an increase in a torque of the motor.
Asakuma teaches
wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrict an increase in a torque of the motor (see at least Asakuma, para. [0026-0029]: As a countermeasure against this, the ECU 22 executes torque limit control routines shown in FIGS. 3 and 4 to be described later, thereby functioning as torque limit control means. When starting after the vehicle stops, the traveling direction of the transmission 12 is switched. Torque limiting control that limits the engine torque (output torque of the engine 11) and limits the driving torque of the vehicle (torque transmitted to the wheels 15) when the accelerator opening increases in the same state as immediately before the vehicle stops… Further, torque limit control is also executed when the accelerator opening increases during deceleration immediately before the vehicle stops. Thus, for example, when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake as a brake pedal during deceleration immediately before the vehicle enters the parking space forward or backward, or immediately before the vehicle stops because the road is congested. When the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake while decelerating, the vehicle driving torque is limited by torque limit control, thereby preventing the vehicle from suddenly starting…para. [0071]: In the above embodiment, the present invention is applied to a vehicle using only an engine as a power source. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and an electric vehicle using only a motor as a power source or a hybrid using both an engine and a motor as a power source. The present invention can also be applied to a car.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrict an increase in a torque of the motor of Asakuma, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve safety while satisfying the demand for cost reduction (see at least Asakuma, para. [0007]).
As per claim 6 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrain the motor rotation speed from increasing.
Asakuma teaches
wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrain the motor rotation speed from increasing (see at least Asakuma, para. [0026-0029]: As a countermeasure against this, the ECU 22 executes torque limit control routines shown in FIGS. 3 and 4 to be described later, thereby functioning as torque limit control means. When starting after the vehicle stops, the traveling direction of the transmission 12 is switched. Torque limiting control that limits the engine torque (output torque of the engine 11) and limits the driving torque of the vehicle (torque transmitted to the wheels 15) when the accelerator opening increases in the same state as immediately before the vehicle stops… Further, torque limit control is also executed when the accelerator opening increases during deceleration immediately before the vehicle stops. Thus, for example, when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake as a brake pedal during deceleration immediately before the vehicle enters the parking space forward or backward, or immediately before the vehicle stops because the road is congested. When the driver depresses the accelerator pedal by mistake while decelerating, the vehicle driving torque is limited by torque limit control, thereby preventing the vehicle from suddenly starting…para. [0071]: In the above embodiment, the present invention is applied to a vehicle using only an engine as a power source. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and an electric vehicle using only a motor as a power source or a hybrid using both an engine and a motor as a power source. The present invention can also be applied to a car.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the motor restraining control is a control to restrain the motor rotation speed from increasing of Asakuma, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve safety while satisfying the demand for cost reduction (see at least Asakuma, para. [0007]).
As per claim 10 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to stop the motor restraining control in response to the at least one shift operation tool being restored.
Asakuma teaches
wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to stop the motor restraining control in response to the at least one shift operation tool being restored (see at least Asakuma, para. [0066]: Sometimes, the torque limit control can be canceled to increase the drive torque, and the vehicle can be prevented from traveling in the direction opposite to the traveling direction determined by the traveling direction switching state of the transmission 12.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to stop the motor restraining control in response to the at least one shift operation tool being restored of Asakuma, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve safety while satisfying the demand for cost reduction (see at least Asakuma, para. [0007]).
As per claim 11 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to stop the motor restraining control in response to the at least one shift operation tool being restored and the motor rotation speed becoming 0 rotations.
Asakuma teaches
wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to stop the motor restraining control in response to the at least one shift operation tool being restored and the motor rotation speed becoming 0 rotations (see at least Asakuma, para. [0066]: Sometimes, the torque limit control can be canceled to increase the drive torque, and the vehicle can be prevented from traveling in the direction opposite to the traveling direction determined by the traveling direction switching state of the transmission 12.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to stop the motor restraining control in response to the at least one shift operation tool being restored and the motor rotation speed becoming 0 rotations of Asakuma, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve safety while satisfying the demand for cost reduction (see at least Asakuma, para. [0007]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogura, in view of Asakuma, in view of US 2014/0046516A1 (“Amundson”).
As per claim 5 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the first rotation speed is 0 rotations.
Amundson teaches
wherein the first rotation speed is 0 rotations (see at least Amundson, para. [0019]: For example, the threshold indicating the electric lawn tractor is not moving may be a traction motor speed in a range of about 0 rpm to about 100 rpm, corresponding to a vehicle speed in forward or reverse of about 0.15 mph depending on transaxle pear rations or other drive train components.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the first rotation speed is 0 rotations of Amundson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a simple and economical electric lawn tractor roll away prevention system and a method that does not require the vehicle to remain in an active, power consuming state, but that allows powering down the vehicle controller and/or electrical systems (see at least Amundson, para. [0004]).
Claim(s) 12-13, & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogura, in view of Asakuma, in view of JP 2010/172207A (“Shiozaki”).
As per claim 12 Ogura discloses
The electric work vehicle according to claim 1 (see at least Ogura, para. [0028]: Although the following description explains the electric work vehicle as being equipped with wheels as a travelling device driven by a travel motor and as traveling by driving of the wheels, it is also possible that the travelling device is a crawler or the like. & para. [0116]), wherein :
However Ogura does not explicitly disclose
the electric work vehicle is configured to perform predetermined notification while the motor is in operation.
Shiozaki teaches
the electric work vehicle is configured to perform predetermined notification while the motor is in operation (see at least Shiozaki, para. [0019]: That is, the safety switch is connected so that it can be confirmed whether the electric motor is being driven or stopped, and is connected to the alarm device. Accordingly, when the safety switch is turned on, an alarm is issued if the safety switch is being driven, so that the operator can recognize that the operator is driving.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of the electric work vehicle is configured to perform predetermined notification while the motor is in operation of Shiozaki, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve power transmission efficiency and reduce power transmission (see at least Shiozaki, para. [0010]).
As per claim 13 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the notification is performed while the motor rotation speed is 0 rotations or equal to or less than the predetermined first rotation speed after the at least one shift operation tool is operated.
Shiozaki teaches
wherein the notification is performed while the motor rotation speed is 0 rotations or equal to or less than the predetermined first rotation speed after the at least one shift operation tool is operated (see at least Shiozaki, para. [0019]: That is, the safety switch is connected so that it can be confirmed whether the electric motor is being driven or stopped, and is connected to the alarm device. Accordingly, when the safety switch is turned on, an alarm is issued if the safety switch is being driven, so that the operator can recognize that the operator is driving. [Examiner Note: When the motor is stopped it is at 0 rotations and an alarm is issued when it is stopped.]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the notification is performed while the motor rotation speed is 0 rotations or equal to or less than the predetermined first rotation speed after the at least one shift operation tool is operated of Shiozaki, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve power transmission efficiency and reduce power transmission (see at least Shiozaki, para. [0010]).
As per claim 16 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
further comprising a notifier to perform the notification.
Shiozaki teaches
further comprising a notifier to perform the notification (see at least Shiozaki, para. [0019]: That is, the safety switch is connected so that it can be confirmed whether the electric motor is being driven or stopped, and is connected to the alarm device. Accordingly, when the safety switch is turned on, an alarm is issued if the safety switch is being driven, so that the operator can recognize that the operator is driving. [Examiner Note: When the motor is stopped it is at 0 rotations and an alarm is issued when it is stopped.]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of further comprising a notifier to perform the notification of Shiozaki, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve power transmission efficiency and reduce power transmission (see at least Shiozaki, para. [0010]).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogura, in view of Asakuma, in view of Shiozaki, in view of US 2017/0203761A1(“Hiemer”), in view of US 2019/0020299A1 (“Lan”).
As per claim 14 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to set the motor rotation speed equal to or less than a predetermined second rotation speed larger than the first rotation speed, in response to the at least one shift operation tool being operated with the motor rotation speed being equal to or less than the first rotation speed; and
the notification is performed by rotary sound of the motor.
Hiemer teaches
wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to set the motor rotation speed equal to or less than a predetermined second rotation speed larger than the first rotation speed, in response to the at least one shift operation tool being operated with the motor rotation speed being equal to or less than the first rotation speed (see at least Hiemer, para. [0062]: as a function of the driver's actuation of the second control element 51, only the upper characteristic line nmoto obtained from an eighth function block FB8 is influenced as a function of the rotational speed value Δnmot determined in the area of the second function block FB2 and weighted in the area of the third function block FB3, whereby the characteristic of the first control element 50 can be varied. Thereafter, the rotational speed nmot1 is determined by appropriate actuation of the first control element 50 in the manner described in connection with FIG. 2in the first function block FB1 as a function of the influenced upper characteristic line nmoto and the fixedly specified lower characteristic line nmotu, and the sum of the rotational speed nmot1 of the drive motor 2 and rotational speed change value ΔnmotHT selected as a function of the driver's actuation of the third control element 52 in the seventh function block FB7 is formed. For this, the rotational speed change value ΔnmotHT is determined as described in relation to FIG. 3, in the area of the seventh function block FB7. Then, the summed value is restricted by the transmission protection limitation of the sixth function block FB6 to a rotational speed range in which no transmission damage can take place.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching wherein the motor controller is configured or programmed to set the motor rotation speed equal to or less than a predetermined second rotation speed larger than the first rotation speed, in response to the at least one shift operation tool being operated with the motor rotation speed being equal to or less than the first rotation speed of Hiemer, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to obtain sufficiently high rotational speeds of the drive motor with little control and regulation effort (see at least Hiemer, para. [0006]).
Lan teaches
the notification is performed by rotary sound of the motor (see at least Lan, para. [0379-0380]: Turning to FIG. 15, the motor 200 is shown as being configured to generate an alert sound 280. In one embodiment, the preheat current 210 can enable the motor 200 to generate the alert sound 280. An exemplary alert sound 280 can comprise any audible sound, such as beeping, music, voice, and/or a combination thereof.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of the notification is performed by rotary sound of the motor of Lan, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve in reliability and safety of the motor in low-temperature environments (see at least Lan, para. [0005]).
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogura, in view of Asakuma, in view of US 2016/0146334A1 (“Nelson”).
As per claim 19 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
further comprising: a hydrostatic continuously variable transmission to shift the rotational power to be transmitted from the motor to the travel device;
wherein the at least one shift operation tool includes an HST operation tool to operate an angle of a cam plate of the hydrostatic continuously variable transmission.
Nelson teaches
further comprising: a hydrostatic continuously variable transmission to shift the rotational -power to be transmitted from the motor to the travel device (see at least Nelson, para. [0067-0068]: In another embodiment, vehicle 10 of FIG. 1 includes a hydrostatic transmission rather than the CVT 48 of FIG. 2. In another embodiment, vehicle 10 includes a sequential transmission rather than the CVT 48 and sub-transmission 56 of FIG. 2. In this embodiment, the sequential transmission is electronically shifted by controller 36 according to the control strategies described herein. An exemplary gear range pattern of a sequential transmission includes reverse gear—first gear—second gear—third gear—fourth gear—fifth gear (R12345), and each gear is electronically controlled by controller 36 based on shift requests from shifter 55 of FIG. 2 as described with respect to sub-transmission 56 of FIG. 2. The sequential transmission may have fewer or additional gears…While vehicle 10 of FIG. 1 and vehicle 310 of FIG. 8 are described herein as including an engine 42 as the power source, vehicle 10, 310 may alternatively include an electric motor as the power source for powering the drivetrain. Vehicle 10, 310 may also comprise a hybrid vehicle having both an electric motor and an engine.);
wherein the at least one shift operation tool includes an HST operation tool to operate an angle of a cam plate of the hydrostatic continuously variable transmission (see at least Nelson, para. [0020]: In one embodiment, sub-transmission 56 is geared to provide a high forward gear, a low forward gear, a reverse gear, a neutral gear, and a park configuration for vehicle 10 of FIG. 1. Fewer or additional gear configurations may be provided with sub-transmission 56. Final drive 58 includes drive line components downstream of sub-transmission 56, including an output shaft, one or more axles, differential(s), and driven wheels 24, for example.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of further comprising: a hydrostatic continuously variable transmission to shift the rotational power to be transmitted from the motor to the travel device, wherein the at least one shift operation tool includes an HST operation tool to operate an angle of a cam plate of the hydrostatic continuously variable transmission of Nelson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to reduce the likelihood of causing damage to the drive-line of the vehicle (see at least Nelson, para. [0046]).
As per claim 20 Ogura does not explicitly disclose
wherein the at least one shift operation tool includes a PTO operation tool to shift the rotational power to be transmitted from the motor to the work device.
Nelson teaches
wherein the at least one shift operation tool includes a PTO operation tool to shift the rotational power to be transmitted from the motor to the work device (see at least Nelson, para. [0020]: In one embodiment, sub-transmission 56 is geared to provide a high forward gear, a low forward gear, a reverse gear, a neutral gear, and a park configuration for vehicle 10 of FIG. 1. Fewer or additional gear configurations may be provided with sub-transmission 56. Final drive 58 includes drive line components downstream of sub-transmission 56, including an output shaft, one or more axles, differential(s), and driven wheels 24, for example & para. [0068]: While vehicle 10 of FIG. 1 and vehicle 310 of FIG. 8 are described herein as including an engine 42 as the power source, vehicle 10, 310 may alternatively include an electric motor as the power source for powering the drivetrain. Vehicle 10, 310 may also comprise a hybrid vehicle having both an electric motor and an engine..).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogura to incorporate the teaching of wherein the at least one shift operation tool includes a PTO operation tool to shift the rotational power to be transmitted from the motor to the work device of Nelson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to reduce the likelihood of causing damage to the drive-line of the vehicle (see at least Nelson, para. [0046]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5PM EST.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668