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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 7/16/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 12, line 20 "speed sensor 15" should be --speed sensor 11--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SHIMOGO et al. (JP 2013112074 A).
Regarding claim 1, SHIMOGO discloses a powertrain for a vehicle, comprising: a first drive unit (4) adapted to drive a propeller shaft (5), the first drive unit (4) is a first electric machine (4), a power take-off device (10) adapted to be driven by the first electric machine (4), a power take-off clutch (11) adapted to be positioned in engaged or disengaged position to mechanically engage or disengage the power take-off device (10) in relation to the first electric machine (4), a control unit (100) to control rotational speed of the first electric machine (4) and to control the power take-off clutch (11) to one of the engaged or disengaged position, and a transmission (2) comprising shafts to drivingly connect the first electric machine (4) to drive the power take-off device (10) and the propeller shaft (5), and where upon an operation demand to disengage the power take-off device (10), the control unit (100) is adapted to first control the first electric machine (4) to brake rotational speed of the power take-off device (10) to zero (see paragraph 0065), and then the control unit (100) is adapted to control the power take-off clutch (11) to a disengaged position, in order to disengage the power take-off device (10) with zero rotational speed.
Regarding claim 2, SHIMOGO discloses the power take-off clutch (11) is a dog clutch.
Regarding claim 3, SHIMOGO discloses the transmission (2) comprises a clutch actuator adapted to be controlled by the control unit (100) and thereby disengage or engage the PTO clutch.
Regarding claim 4, SHIMOGO discloses the transmission (2) comprises: a first input shaft drivingly connected to the first electric machine (4), an output shaft drivingly connected to the propeller shaft (5), a second shaft to which the power take-off device (10) is drivingly connectable or connected via the power take-off clutch (11), and a gearwheel pair to drivingly connect the second shaft to one of the first input shaft or the output shaft.
Regarding claim 5, SHIMOGO discloses the transmission (2) further comprises: additional gearwheel pairs to drivingly connect the first input shaft to the second shaft, and the second shaft to the output shaft, the second shaft is a countershaft.
Regarding claim 6, SHIMOGO discloses a second drive unit is adapted to drive the propeller shaft (5) via a second input shaft and a gearwheel pair.
Regarding claim 7, SHIMOGO discloses the second drive unit is one of an electric machine or an internal combustion engine or a gas turbine engine.
Regarding claim 8, SHIMOGO discloses vehicle comprising a powertrain according to claim 1.
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) 9, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIMOGO et al. (JP 2013112074 A) as applied to claims 1-8 above, and further in view of WYATT et al. (US 2009/0065273).
Regarding claim 9, SHIMOGO discloses a method for controlling a powertrain, the method comprising: disengaging the power take-off device.
SHIMOGO does not disclose registering a request to disengage the power take-off device, braking rotational speed of the power take-off device, and registering zero rotational speed of the power take-off device.
WYATT teaches a powertrain and a method to control the powertrain, wherein the method comprises: registering a request to disengage the power take-off device (PTO switch deactivation), braking rotational speed of the power take-off device (paragraph 0051), and registering zero rotational speed of the power take-off device (the cutting blades stopped, paragraph (0071).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of controlling the powertrain disclosed by SHIMOGO to include registering a request to disengage the power take-off device, braking rotational speed of the power take-off device, and registering zero rotational speed of the power take-off device, as taught by WYATT to enable the use of regenerative braking in the slowing of the mower blades to potentially increase the working time of the vehicle (WYATT, [0051]).
Regarding claim 11, SHIMOGO-WYATT discloses the control unit registering zero rotational speed of the power take-off device by registering that the first electric machine has reached zero rotational speed. (WYATT, [0051])
Regarding claim 13, SHIMOGO-WYATT discloses a control unit (100) configured to perform the method according to one of claim 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 12 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Shimogo does not disclose “the control unit adapted to first control the first electric machine to brake rotational speed of the power take-off device to zero, and then the control unit is adapted to control the power take-off clutch to a disengaged position, in order to disengage the power take-off device with zero rotational speed.” (Emphasis added).
As the claim is written, the prior art need only be capable of preforming the control function that is recited. As the claims are apparatus claims, and are defined by what the invention is, not by functional language. The prior art has all the structure that would enable it to perform the recited control functions. See MPEP 2114 (II).
Because the prior art discloses all the claimed structural elements, and is capable of preforming the control functions, Examiner finds applicant’s arguments 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 DEREK D. KNIGHT whose telephone number is (571)272-7951. The examiner can normally be reached Telework: From 5:30am-1:30pm 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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
/DEREK D KNIGHT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights