Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 19/103,046

UNIT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 11, 2025
Examiner
LEWIS, TISHA D
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Jatco LTD
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
1075 granted / 1227 resolved
+35.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1258
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§102
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
§112
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1227 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The following is a first action on the merits of application serial no. 19/103046 filed 2/11/2025. 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed 2/11/25 has been considered. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the one side of the first engagement element and the one side of the second engagement element implemented as an integrated component” as recited in claim 5 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: -On pages 3 to 4, paragraph [0010], the abbreviated figures in brackets (i.e, [FIG. 1]) should be deleted due to the presence of the unbracket abbreviated figures (i.e., FIG. 1. -The title of the invention is not descriptive, the use of the term “Unit” as a title doesn’t seem to technically, accurately describe the invention. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following titles are suggested: “Transmission Unit”, “Power Transmission Mechanism”, “Power Transmission Unit”, etc.. The title change may result in a slightly longer title, but the loss in brevity of title will be more than offset by the gain in its informative value in indexing, classifying, searching, etc., see MPEP 606. 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al 20110111908. As to claim 1, Kim discloses a unit comprising (Figure 9 is being used as reference): an input element (extending from ENGINE, MG1 and MG2); an output element (OUTPUT); and a gear device including a first rotational part, a second rotational part, a third rotational part, and a fourth rotational part arranged in this order on an alignment chart (see annotated Figure below), wherein the input element is connectable to the first rotational part (via input from MG2) and connectable to the second rotational part (via input from Engine), the output element is connected to the third rotational part (via C2 to Output), the fourth rotational part is switchable between a rotating state and a non-rotating state (via BK1 to R2), the gear device includes a first planetary gear mechanism including a first rotational element (R2), a second rotational element (C2), and a third rotational element (S2), the second rotational element being disposed between the first rotational element and the third rotational element on the alignment chart (in Figure 9, C2 is shown on chart between R2 and S2), and a second planetary gear mechanism including a fourth rotational element (S1-1), a fifth rotational element (C1), and a sixth rotational element (R1), the fifth rotational element being disposed between the fourth rotational element and the sixth rotational element on the alignment chart (in Figure 9, C1 is shown on chart between R1 and S1-1), the first rotational part is implemented by coupling (as shown in gearing arrangement side in Figure 9) the third rotational element (S2) and the fourth rotational element (S1-1), the second rotational part is implemented by the fifth rotational element (C1), the third rotational part is implemented by coupling the second rotational element (C2) and the sixth rotational element (R1), and the fourth rotational part is implemented by the first rotational element (R2). PNG media_image1.png 378 340 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim(s) 1, 2, 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oba 9770971. As to claim 1, Oba discloses a unit comprising: an input element (21); an output element (70); and a gear device including a first rotational part, a second rotational part, a third rotational part, and a fourth rotational part arranged in this order on an alignment chart (see annotated Figure below), wherein the input element is connectable to the first rotational part (via C1) and connectable to the second rotational part (via C2), the output element is connected to the third rotational part (via R1 to 71), the fourth rotational part is switchable between a rotating state and a non-rotating state (via B1 to R2), the gear device includes a first planetary gear mechanism (50) including a first rotational element (R2), a second rotational element (CA2), and a third rotational element (S2), the second rotational element being disposed between the first rotational element and the third rotational element on the alignment chart (in Figure 3, Car2 is shown on chart between R2 and S2), and a second planetary gear mechanism (40) including a fourth rotational element (S1), a fifth rotational element (C1), and a sixth rotational element (R1), the fifth rotational element being disposed between the fourth rotational element and the sixth rotational element on the alignment chart (in Figure 3, Car1 is shown on chart between R1 and S1), the first rotational part is implemented by coupling (as shown in Figure 1 gearing arrangement) the third rotational element (S2) and the fourth rotational element (S1), the second rotational part is implemented by the fifth rotational element (CA1), the third rotational part is implemented by coupling the second rotational element (CA2) and the sixth rotational element (R1), and the fourth rotational part is implemented by the first rotational element (R2). PNG media_image2.png 382 534 media_image2.png Greyscale As to claim 2, further comprising: a first engagement element (C2); a second engagement element (C1); and a third engagement element (B1), wherein one side of the first engagement element is connected to the input element (side of C2 connected to 21), the other side of the first engagement element is connected to the second rotational part (side of C2 connected to CA1), one side of the second engagement element is connected to the input element (side of C1 connected to 21), the other side of the second engagement element is connected to the first rotational part (side of C1 connected to S1, S2), one side of the third engagement element is connected to the fourth rotational part (side of B1 connected to R2), and the other side of the third engagement element is fixed (side of B1 connected to 25). As to claim 4, wherein three gear positions are implemented by changing two elements to be engaged among the first to third engagement elements (as shown in column 5, Table 1). As to claim 5, wherein the one side of the first engagement element and the one side of the second engagement element are implemented as an integrated component (as shown in Figure 1, C1 and C2 share same outer periphery). 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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oba in view of Mellet et al 20150087464. Oba discloses first to third engagement elements wherein two of the elements are axially disposed outward of gear device (C1 and C2). However, Oba discloses the one engagement element radially disposed outward of gear device, not axially as recited. Mellet discloses a unit having a gear device including first and second planetary gear mechanisms with three engagement elements (58, 60, 56) and shows that it is well known in the art to provide the elements axially disposed outward of the gear device (as shown in Figure 3). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the radial position of the Oba engagement element into an axial position in view of Mellet to reduce the radial length of unit which increases compactness of unit and increases space within unit housing during assembly of unit. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. -JP 4222302 discloses a unit including a gear device and shows that it is well known in the art to provide the gear device including a first rotational part, a second rotational part, a third rotational part, and a fourth rotational part arranged in this order on an alignment chart, wherein the input element is connectable to the first rotational part and connectable to the second rotational part, the output element is connected to the third rotational part, the fourth rotational part is switchable between a rotating state and a non-rotating state (as shown for example in Figures 1, 7 and 11). However, JP does lack the implementations of the rotational parts by the particular planetary rotational elements as recited. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TISHA D LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7093. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30am to 5:00pm. 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, Anna M Momper can be reached at 571-270-5788. 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. Tdl /TISHA D LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 December 7, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 11, 2025
Application Filed
Dec 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 23, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600357
COMPUTER SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592441
VIBRATION ISOLATORS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE-BATTERY ENCLOSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592440
BATTERY PACK CASING HAVING CRUSH RESISTANCE AND THERMAL INSULATION FOR ELECTRIFIED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590867
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING CONTINUOUSLY VARIABLE TRANSMISSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583439
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTING A DISCONNECT CLUTCH TIME TO CONNECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+9.2%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1227 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month