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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 5, 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim 27 is 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 27 recites “an active clutch” and “a passive clutch” which are both already positively claimed in claim 26. Thus, it is unclear whether these cover the same components as claim 26 or distinct components.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nitani et al. (US 2020/0124172; hereinafter “Nitani”).
Claim 29
Nitani discloses a wheel end (e.g., right end of 50), comprising:
a wheel hub cover (52); and
an active and passive overrunning wheel hub clutch (see FIG. 2, e.g., passive 72a and 73a, active 72b and 73b) coupled to the wheel hub cover (52), and including
an active clutch (left clutch in FIG. 2, including e.g., 72b, 73b, 90) including a plurality of active struts (72b); and
a passive clutch (right clutch in FIG. 2, including 72a, 73a) including a plurality of passive struts (72a) separate from the plurality of active struts (72b).
Claim 30
Nitani discloses wherein the active and passive overrunning wheel hub clutch (72a, 72b) is retained to the wheel hub cover (52) by at least one retainer ring (74) such that the wheel hub cover and the active and passive overrunning wheel hub clutch constitute a self-contained assembly as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 9, 10, and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eckhoff et al. (DE 102014208604A1; hereainfter "Eckhoff") in view of Nitani.
Claim 1
Eckhoff discloses a wheel hub clutch comprising
a clutch hub (see annotated FIG. 1 below);
a vehicle wheel hub (see annotated FIG. 1 below); and
a freewheel unit (17a) between the clutch hub and the wheel hub to couple and decouple the vehicle wheel hub relative to the clutch hub.
It is noted that both drive axles include the freewheel as elements 17a and 17b and that either one may be used in the rejection. Eckhoff does not disclose the details of the freewheel unit and thus does not disclose that the freewheel unit includes the active clutch and passive clutch as these are recited in the claim. Specifically, Eckhoff does not disclose that the freewheel includes an active clutch between the clutch hub and the vehicle wheel hub to couple and decouple the vehicle wheel hub relative to the clutch hub, and including a plurality of active struts; and a passive clutch between the clutch hub and the vehicle wheel hub, and including a plurality of passive struts separate from the plurality of active struts.
PNG
media_image1.png
590
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Nitani discloses an active and passive overrunning wheel hub clutch,
comprising (see e.g., FIG. 2):
a clutch hub (52);
a wheel hub (50);
an active clutch (left clutch in FIG. 2, including e.g., 72b, 73b, 90) between the clutch hub (52, via 68) and the wheel hub (50 via 70b), and including a plurality of active struts (72b); and
a passive clutch (right clutch in FIG. 2, including 72a, 73a) between the clutch hub (52, via 68) and the wheel hub (50 via 70a), and including a plurality of passive struts (72a) separate from the plurality of active struts (72b).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to
have modified Eckhoff so that the freewheel unit includes the structure taught by Nitani
in order to provide more control and functionality over the freewheel unit.
For example, such a modification of Nitani would allow for control of whether torque in a chosen direction, such as a reverse direction/backdrive or a forward direction, was only permitted in one rotation direction.
Claim 2
Eckhoff discloses a dual plane, overrunning wheel hub clutch comprising
a clutch hub (see annotated FIG. 1 above);
a vehicle wheel hub (see annotated FIG. 1 above); and
a freewheel unit (17a) between the clutch hub and the vehicle wheel hub to
couple and decouple the vehicle wheel hub relative to the clutch hub.
Eckhoff does not disclose the details of the freewheel unit and thus does not
disclose that the freewheel unit includes the active clutch and passive clutch as these
are recited in the claim.
However, Nitani discloses:
a first clutch component (68) coupled to the clutch hub (52);
a second clutch component (70a, 70b) coupled to the wheel hub (50);
an active clutch (left clutch in FIG. 2, including e.g., 72b, 73b, 90) between the clutch hub (52, via 68) and the wheel hub (50 via 70b), and including a plurality of active struts (72b); and
a passive clutch (right clutch in FIG. 2, including 72a, 73a) between the clutch hub (52, via 68) and the wheel hub (50 via 70a), and including a plurality of passive struts (72a) separate from the plurality of active struts (72b).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to
have modified Eckhoff so that the freewheel unit includes the structure taught by Nitani
in order to provide more control and functionality over the freewheel unit.
For example, such a modification of Nitani would allow for control of whether torque in a chosen direction, such as a reverse direction/backdrive or a forward direction, was only permitted in one rotation direction.
As so modified, the wheel hub clutch would be both active and passive.
Claim 9
Eckhoff as modified by Nitani discloses:
a clutch component (Nitani, 68) coupled to the clutch hub (Nitani, 52);
the active clutch (Nitani, left clutch in FIG. 2, including e.g., 726, 73b, 90) between the clutch component (68) and the wheel hub (50, specifically 70b); and
the passive clutch (Nitani, right clutch in FIG. 2, including 72a, 73a) between the clutch component (Nitani, 68) and the wheel hub (Nitani, 50, specifically 70a).
Claim 10
Eckhoff as modified by Nitani discloses wherein the active clutch is an active
radial clutch or an active planar clutch, and the passive clutch is a passive planar clutch
or a passive radial clutch (see Nitani, FIG. 2, both clutches as planar clutches).
Claim 26
Eckhoff discloses a wheel hub
a vehicle axle (see annotated FIG. 1 above, "clutch hub");
a vehicle wheel hub (see annotated FIG. 1 above); and
a freewheel unit (17a) between the clutch hub and the vehicle wheel hub to couple and decouple the vehicle wheel hub relative to the clutch hub.
Eckhoff does not disclose the details of the freewheel unit and thus does not
disclose that the freewheel unit includes the active clutch and passive clutch as these
are recited in the claim.
However, Nitani discloses an apparatus, comprising:
an axle (50);
a wheel hub (52); and
an active and passive overrunning wheel hub clutch (left active clutch and right passive clutch in FIG. 2 as part of the TWC of FIG. 1) disposed between the axle and the wheel hub, and including
an active clutch (left clutch in FIG. 2, including e.g., 72b, 73b, 90) including a plurality of active struts (72b); and
a passive clutch (right clutch in FIG. 2, including 72a, 73a) including a plurality of passive struts (72a) separate from the plurality of active struts (72b).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to
have modified Eckhoff so that the freewheel unit includes the structure taught by Nitani
in order to provide more control and functionality over the freewheel unit.
For example, such a modification of Nitani would allow for control of whether torque in a chosen direction, such as a reverse direction/backdrive or a forward direction, was only permitted in one rotation direction.
Claim 27
Eckhoff in view of Nitani discloses wherein the active and passive overrunning
wheel hub clutch includes:
a clutch hub (Nitani, 70a, 70b);
an active clutch (Nitani, left clutch in FIG. 2) between the clutch hub (Nitani, 70a, 70b) and the vehicle wheel hub (Nitani, 52 and/or 68); and
a passive clutch (Nitani, right clutch in FIG. 2) between the clutch hub (Nitani, 70a, 70b) and the vehicle wheel hub (Nitani, 52 and/or 68).
Claim 28
Eckhoff in view of Nitani discloses a vehicle, comprising:
the apparatus of claim 26 (see rejection of claim 26 and annotated FIG. 1 in rejection of claim 1);
a drivetrain (11 or 6) coupled to the axle (Eckhoff, one or both of the axles connected to 14a or 14b); and
a wheel (Eckhoff, 14a or 14b) coupled to the wheel hub (see annotated FIG. 1 of Eckhoff in rejection of claim 1; akin to Nitani, 52).
Claim(s) 1, 9, 10, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eckhoff in view of Bird et al. (US 8,418,825).
Claim 1
Eckhoff discloses a vehicle wheel hub
a vehicle axle/clutch hub (see annotated FIG. 1 above, "clutch hub");
a vehicle wheel hub (see annotated FIG. 1 above); and
a freewheel unit (17a) between the clutch hub and the wheel hub to couple and decouple the vehicle wheel hub relative to the clutch hub.
Eckhoff does not disclose the details of the freewheel unit and thus does not
disclose that the freewheel unit includes the active clutch and passive clutch as these
are recited in the claim.
Bird discloses an active and passive overrunning wheel hub clutch, comprising
(FIGS. 13 and 14):
a clutch hub (82; or 82 and 102);
a wheel hub ("rotating member of the transmission" that is engaged with splines 22; or alternatively shaft connected to 22 and 106);
an active clutch (within 104 and 110, 18, 19, set of struts 32 within pockets 104) between the clutch hub (82; or 82 and 102) and the wheel hub ("rotating member" connected to 22), and including a plurality of active struts (32 within pockets 104); and
a passive clutch (strut within 108 and 114, and set of struts 32 within pockets 108) between the clutch hub ("rotating member" connected to 22) and the wheel hub (82; or 82 and 102) (see column 4, lines paragraph), and including a plurality of passive struts (32 within pockets 108, referred to as “magnetically impermeably strut” within 108).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to
have modified Eckhoff so that the freewheel unit includes the structure taught by Bird
in order to provide more control and functionality over the freewheel unit.
For example, such a modification of Nitani would allow for control of whether torque in a chosen direction, such as a reverse direction/backdrive or a forward direction, was only permitted in one rotation direction.
Claim 9
Eckhoff in view of Bird discloses (Bird, FIGS. 13 and 14):
a clutch component (Bird, 102) coupled to the clutch hub (Bird, 82);
the active clutch (Bird, in 104 and 110) between the clutch component (Bird, 102) and the wheel hub (Bird, 106); and
the passive clutch (Bird, in 108 and 114) between the clutch component (Bird, 102) and the wheel hub (Bird, 106).
Claim 10
Eckhoff in view of Bird discloses wherein the active clutch is an active radial
clutch or an active planar clutch, and the passive clutch is a passive planar clutch or a
passive radial clutch (see Bird, FIG. 13 or 14, both clutches as planar clutches).
Claim 19
Eckhoff in view of Bird discloses wherein
the clutch is a single plane clutch (see Bird, FIG. 13);
the active clutch (Bird, clutch within 104 and 110) includes an active axial pocket (Bird, 104) in an outboard face (Bird, right face of 102) of the clutch component (Bird, 102), an active axial notch (Bird, 110) in an inboard face (Bird, left face of 1026) of the wheel hub (Bird, 106), and an active axial strut (Bird, 32) carried in the active axial pocket (Bird, 104); and
the passive clutch (Bird, clutch within 108 and 114) includes a passive axial pocket (Bird, 108) in the outboard face (Bird, right face of 102) of the clutch component (Bird, 102), a passive axial notch (Bird, 114) in the inboard face (Bird, left face of 106) of the wheel hub (Bird, 106), and a passive axial strut (Bird, 32) carried in the passive axial pocket (Bird, 108), wherein the passive axial pocket, the passive axial notch, and the passive axial strut are all circumferentially spaced from the active axial pocket, the active axial notch, and the active axial strut (see Bird, FIG. 14 illustrating the passive clutches offset circumferentially from the active clutches).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 7-8, 11, 15, and 23 are allowed.
Claims 12-13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: See “Allowable Subject Matter” in final Office Action dated October 6, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the rejections that rely upon Eckhoff, Applicant argues that the Examiner cannot rely upon only the drawing and previously provided English-language Abstract for what these discloses and must instead use a translation of the entire document. Drawings can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed and must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2125). Arguments that a translation may disclose contrary teachings on the other hand cannot be relied upon. Nonetheless, a machine translation has been provided. If Applicant has evidence that the translation is inaccurate, such evidence once provided will be considered. Confirming the structure illustrated in FIG. 1, the present machine translation describes “a freewheel between the differential and the wheels” (see paragraph [0008]), that “it is provided that the freewheel is assigned to a respective wheel hub of the wheels of the connectable second axle” (see paragraph [0011]), and that “[t]hese freewheel arrangements allow the freewheels to be placed in or on the wheel hub or the housing of the differential as part of a preassembly” (see paragraph [0011]). In addition, as is well understood by those skilled in the art, the translation also confirms operation of this freewheel with its description as follows:
“The use of freewheels on the drive shafts ensures that, when the connectable axle of the vehicle is deactivated by means of a shift element preferably assigned to the central transfer case, the entire downstream drive train of this axle, which drive train encloses a differential, does not execute any rotation.”
Applicant also argues that element 15a appears to be a differential driveshaft but does not appear to be a clutch hub and element 4 appears to be an axle shaft but does not appear to be a wheel hub. To the contrary, elements 4 and 15a together form the one half shaft that is divided into two parts by a freewheel clutch. Depending on the structure of the freewheel clutch, this can operate for example by overrunning in only one direction, can be selectively overrun in one direction, or can be selectively overrun in two directions. Nonetheless, in all freewheels there necessarily will be one part rotating with the wheel and another part rotating with the shaft exiting the differential; the clutch elements which could be all sorts of types would be between these two structure which would be the two clutch hubs. The structure of this freewheel is not illustrated nor discussed in detail in Eckhoff and furthermore is proposed to be replaced by a more detailed and specific freewheel which is that disclosed in Nitani or Bird. It is the proposed combination that should be addressed. There is no reason apparent in the record why one would not modified Eckhoff to include a different type of freewheel clutch. As such, these rejections must be maintained.
With regard to the rejections that rely upon Nitani, Applicant argues that interpreting member 52 as a hub cover is unreasonably broad. The Examiner responds that the claim is intended to be broad. The claim elements are a cover and a clutch (including the two parts) coupled to the cover. A wheel is not a positive recitation of the claim. This claim as it is currently written is not limited to being directly connected to a wheel or inside a wheel. In an effort to promote compact prosecution, it is noted that if the claim were modified to include a wheel with the clutch thereinside, Eckhoff discloses the freewheels may be placed in or on the wheel hub and therefore a 103 rejection would be likely.
It is noted for the 103 rejections, that the primary reference is relied upon for the general location of the freewheel at the wheel along the axle. Nitani and Bird are relied upon solely for their respective disclosures of a specific type of freewheel. The rejections each include reasons why one might desire to use the known specific freewheel in the location already disclosed by Eckhoff. These reasons are not countered as being flawed or inaccurate. The manner of engaging and disengaging the clutch is irrelevant to whether or not a combination freewheel like that taught by Nitani and Bird would have been obvious to have substituted into Eckhoff since any clutch actuator would suffice to control the clutch.
In addition, for clarity of the record, with regard to the Examiner’s prior assertion regarding the prior art “hanging on the walls all around him” this depiction of a manner of viewing obviousness was not intended to supplant the obviousness statement with an obvious to try rationale, but rather was an old adage from 1966 caselaw.
In view of the above, the arguments are not found to be persuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACEY A FLUHART whose telephone number is (571)270-1851. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-7PM.
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.
/STACEY A FLUHART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655