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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 17th, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 5-7, filed March 17th, 2026, with respect to the art-based rejection(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The art-based rejections of the claims have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 5-8, and 10-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the friction elements are designed with an internal set of teeth without friction linings, and the friction elements are designed with an external set of teeth with friction linings” (and the alternative, see final paragraph of claim). Both clauses use the identical term “the friction elements”, yet they must refer to different friction elements. A singular friction element cannot simultaneously be designed with internal set of teeth without friction linings and designed with an external set of teeth with friction linings. It is therefore unclear whether the claim requires a. each friction element to bear both an internal and external set of teeth, or b. a first subset with internal teeth (unlined by friction elements) and a second subset with external teeth (lined by friction elements).
Regarding claim 6, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 6, 8, and 10 recite the limitation "the friction flanges" in line 2 (claim 6) and lines 1-2 (claims 8 and 10). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 7 and 10 recite the limitation "the intermediate coupling section" in line 2 (claim 7) and line 3 (claim 10). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim (previously referenced as “the intermediate section”).
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the coupling hub” (line 2). However, there are multiple “coupling hubs” recited in claim 1. It’s not clear which is being referenced.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the drive train”. However, because of how the claim is constructed, this is not clear because the drive train is recited in claim 1 to attach to a coupling of claim 1. See the difference between this claim and claim 13.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the two friction elements”. However, claim 1 recites that there are more than two friction elements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN D SEABE whose telephone number is (571)272-4961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00-5:30.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/JUSTIN D SEABE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights