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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7-8, 10-11, 16-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al (US PGPub No. 2005/0113201) in view of Jagle et al (US PGPub No. 2018/0229604).
Kimura teaches:
limitations from claims 1 and 19, a system/method (FIG. 1), comprising: a machine (6) configured to be driven at variable speed by a drive system, comprising: a gearbox (B) including a first gear (C) driven by a first input shaft (21), a second gear (1) driven by a second input shaft (23), and a third gear (2) driven by the first gear and the second gear (paragraphs 58-59 and 65), the third gear (2) driving an output shaft (22) operatively coupled to an output element (6); a first motor (4) configured to operate at a constant drive speed (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55), the first motor operatively coupled to the first input shaft (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55); and a second motor (5) configured to operate at a variable drive speed via a variable frequency drive (Kimura is a variably driven electric motor, and thus is configured to, operate via a VFD which are commonly known drives of electric motors; the examiner notes that the VFD is not positively claimed), the second motor operatively coupled to the second input shaft (FIG. 1; paragraph 56);
Kimura teaches that the drive system drives fluid machinery, but does not explicitly teach a compressor;
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to utilize the system of Kimura to drive a variety of fluid machines, including a compressor; the system of Kimura is capable of driving various rotary machines via output shaft 22. In this case, a compressor is a fluid machine, and would benefit from having a robust variable speed drive to control output.
Kimura teaches the use of a brake to lock the rotation of the motors (gear 1, motors 4, 5; paragraphs 68-69), but does not explicitly teach a lock-up clutch;
Jagle teaches an epicyclic gearset (10) in which two different drives (3, and 1 via 17) of the gearing are locked using a lock-up clutch (FIG. 2; paragraphs 29-30 in which the gearing is locked or allowed to freely rotate relative to one another);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known mechanism for another in order to lock the rotation of two rotating components, such as the lock-up clutch of Jagle for the generic “brake” of Kimura, as a matter of design choice in order to reach an expected result (i.e. the locking of rotational components).
PNG
media_image1.png
534
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kimura further teaches:
limitations from claim 7, wherein the first motor comprises a hollow motor shaft (Cj) through which an output shaft (23) of the second motor passes through, to operatively couple the second motor to the second gear (FIG. 1);
limitations from claim 8, wherein the hollow motor shaft (Cj) is operatively coupled to the first input shaft (21; FIG. 1);
Kimura further teaches:
limitations from claim 10, a drive system (FIG. 1), comprising: a gearbox (B) including a first gear (C) driven by a first input shaft (21), a second gear (1) driven by a second input shaft (23), and a third gear (2) driven by the first gear and the second gear (paragraphs 58-59 and 65), the third gear (2) driving an output shaft (22) operatively coupled to an output element (6); a first motor (4) configured to operate at a constant drive speed (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55), the first motor operatively coupled to the first input shaft (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55); and a second motor (5) configured to operate at a variable drive speed via a variable frequency drive (Kimura is a variably driven electric motor, and thus is configured to, operate via a VFD which are commonly known drives of electric motors; the examiner notes that the VFD is not positively claimed), the second motor operatively coupled to the second input shaft (FIG. 1; paragraph 56);
Kimura teaches the use of a brake to lock the rotation of the motors (gear 1, motors 4, 5; paragraphs 68-69), but does not explicitly teach a lock-up clutch;
Jagle teaches an epicyclic gearset (10) in which two portions of the gearing are locked using a lock-up clutch (FIG. 1; paragraphs 29-30);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known mechanism for another in order to lock the rotation of two rotating components, such as the lock-up clutch of Jagle for the generic “brake” of Kimura, as a matter of design choice in order to reach an expected result (i.e. the locking of rotational components).
PNG
media_image1.png
534
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kimura further teaches:
limitations from claim 16, wherein the first motor comprises a hollow motor shaft (Cj) through which an output shaft (23) of the second motor passes through, to operatively couple the second motor to the second gear (FIG. 1);
limitations from claim 17, wherein the hollow motor shaft (Cj) is operatively coupled to the first input shaft (21; FIG. 1);
Regarding Claims 2, 11, and 20:
Kimura teaches a sun gear (1), carrier gear (C), and ring gear (2), but does not teach the gears in the order of Claim 11;
However, Jagle teaches:
limitations from claims 2, 11, and 20, an epicyclic gearset (10) including a gearbox (6), in which, a first gear comprises a ring gear (12, from drive line 3; paragraph 42), a second gear comprising a sun gear (11, from drive line 17; paragraph 41), and a third gear driven by the first and second gearing and comprising a carrier gear (10 driven by 11-12 and outputting power to a driven component 8-9; paragraph 41);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to arrange the gearing in the drive system of Kimura using the particular gearing order of Claims 2 and 11 and as taught by Jagle, as a matter of design choice in order to couple two inputs to an output in a known manner. Further, it has been held that the rearrangement of parts that are otherwise taught by the prior art requires only routine skill (see MPEP 2144.04 Section VI. C); additionally the applicant does not disclose that the claimed gearing has a particular criticality.
Claim(s) 3-5 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al (US PGPub No. 2005/0113201) in view of Jagle et al (US PGPub No. 2018/0229604) as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and in further view of Nyeste et al (US Patent No. 3,802,795).
Regarding claims 3-5 and 12:
Kimura teaches a transfer gear set (g1, g2), and that the shaft (23) of the second motor (5) passes through a gear (g2) of the first motor (4), but does not teach that the gearing includes spur gears;
Nyeste teaches an epicyclic gearing (48 for example) in a compressor (1); and wherein the gearing includes the use of spur-type gearing (47; C. 10 Lines 40-47 and C. 11 Lines 44-47);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known gear type for another, such as spur gears for the generic gears of Kimura as taught by Nyeste, as different gear types are known to have different advantages (see C. 10 Lines 40-47 of Nyeste teaching that spur gearing can reduce or eliminate axial thrust);
Kimura further teaches:
limitations from claim 13, wherein the transfer gear set comprises a first transfer gear (g1) and a second transfer gear (g2), wherein an output shaft (21) of the first motor is configured to rotate the first transfer gear which rotates the second transfer gear, wherein the first input shaft (Cj) is rotated by the second transfer gear;
limitations from claim 14, wherein the output shaft (23) of the second motor passes through the second transfer gear (g2) of the transfer gear set (FIG. 1);
Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al (US PGPub No. 2005/0113201) in view of Jagle et al (US PGPub No. 2018/0229604) as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and in further view of Quick et al (US Patent No. 5,125,806).
Kimura teaches a gear set (g1, g2), and that the shaft (23) of the second motor (5) passes through a gear (g2) of the first motor (4), but does not teach that the gearing includes bevel gears;
However, Quick teaches that bevel gears (210-211) are known to be used in planetary gearing sets to drive compressors (18; C. 5 Lines 26-39 for example);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known gear type for another, such as bevel gears for the generic gears of Kimura as taught by Quick, as a matter of design choice to reach an expected result (i.e. the coupling of rotary members). Quick teaches that gears of any type can be satisfactorily substituted for one another (C. 5 Lines 30-32 of Quick).
Claim(s) 1, 10, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al (US PGPub No. 2005/0113201) in view of Minteer et al (US PGPub No. 2015/0211529).
Kimura teaches:
limitations from claims 1 and 19, a system/method (FIG. 1), comprising: a machine (6) configured to be driven at variable speed by a drive system, comprising: a gearbox (B) including a first gear (C) driven by a first input shaft (21), a second gear (1) driven by a second input shaft (23), and a third gear (2) driven by the first gear and the second gear (paragraphs 58-59 and 65), the third gear (2) driving an output shaft (22) operatively coupled to an output element (6); a first motor (4) configured to operate at a constant drive speed (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55), the first motor operatively coupled to the first input shaft (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55); and a second motor (5) configured to operate at a variable drive speed via a variable frequency drive (Kimura is a variably driven electric motor, and thus is configured to, operate via a VFD which are commonly known drives of electric motors; the examiner notes that the VFD is not positively claimed), the second motor operatively coupled to the second input shaft (FIG. 1; paragraph 56);
Kimura teaches that the drive system drives fluid machinery, but does not explicitly teach a compressor;
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to utilize the system of Kimura to drive a variety of fluid machines, including a compressor; the system of Kimura is capable of driving various rotary machines via output shaft 22. In this case, a compressor is a fluid machine, and would benefit from having a robust variable speed drive to control output.
Kimura teaches the use of a brake to lock the rotation of the motors (gear 1, motors 4, 5; paragraphs 68-69), but does not explicitly teach a lock-up clutch;
Minteer teaches a pump (14) driven via a motor (12), with a gearing therebetween (18); and wherein a lock-up clutch (20) is utilized to lock the drive input and the gearing (paragraphs 16 and 21-22);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known mechanism for another or added the lock-up clutch to Kimura in order to lock the rotation of the input drive and the gearing, such as the lock-up clutch of Minteer for the generic “brake” of Kimura, as a matter of design choice in order to reach an expected result (i.e. the locking of rotational components); Minteer further teaches the lock-up clutch can be used to further control output in a more accurate manner (paragraph 21).
Kimura further teaches:
limitations from claim 7, wherein the first motor comprises a hollow motor shaft (Cj) through which an output shaft (23) of the second motor passes through, to operatively couple the second motor to the second gear (FIG. 1);
limitations from claim 8, wherein the hollow motor shaft (Cj) is operatively coupled to the first input shaft (21; FIG. 1);
Kimura further teaches:
limitations from claim 10, a drive system (FIG. 1), comprising: a gearbox (B) including a first gear (C) driven by a first input shaft (21), a second gear (1) driven by a second input shaft (23), and a third gear (2) driven by the first gear and the second gear (paragraphs 58-59 and 65), the third gear (2) driving an output shaft (22) operatively coupled to an output element (6); a first motor (4) configured to operate at a constant drive speed (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55), the first motor operatively coupled to the first input shaft (see FIG. 1; paragraph 55); and a second motor (5) configured to operate at a variable drive speed via a variable frequency drive (Kimura is a variably driven electric motor, and thus is configured to, operate via a VFD which are commonly known drives of electric motors; the examiner notes that the VFD is not positively claimed), the second motor operatively coupled to the second input shaft (FIG. 1; paragraph 56);
Kimura teaches the use of a brake to lock the rotation of the motors (gear 1, motors 4, 5; paragraphs 68-69), but does not explicitly teach a lock-up clutch;
Minteer teaches a pump (14) driven via a motor (12), with a gearing therebetween (18); and wherein a lock-up clutch (20) is utilized to lock the drive input and the gearing (paragraphs 16 and 21-22);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of drive systems at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known mechanism for another or added the lock-up clutch to Kimura in order to lock the rotation of the input drive and the gearing, such as the lock-up clutch of Minteer for the generic “brake” of Kimura, as a matter of design choice in order to reach an expected result (i.e. the locking of rotational components); Minteer further teaches the lock-up clutch can be used to further control output in a more accurate manner (paragraph 21).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
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 CHRISTOPHER S BOBISH whose telephone number is (571)270-5289. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER S BOBISH/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights