DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Status of Claims
This is the first office action on the merits of Application No. 19/116,477 filed on 03/28/2025. Claims 9-16 are pending.
Priority
Application claims the benefit of German Application No. DE10 2022 003 617.7 filed 09/29/2022. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 38 and 32 and the dotted lined boxes in fig. 1.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
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, a support direction in claim 9 and a claw switching element in claim 15 and brake switching element in claim 16 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:
Para 29, line 7, the switching element 32 should read the switching element 34.
Figure 1 shows element 38 and 32 but those are not disclosed in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim 9 and 15 contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 9 discloses a second switching element in line 10. The specification does not disclose the proper structure and how the second switching element works. For example, the specification discloses that in para 29 “The transmission device 10 has a second switching element 34, in particular provided in addition to the first switching element 28, which lies opposite the first switching element 28 in the axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling 14. The disc pack 18 can be actuated by means of the second switching element 34 in a second actuating direction, extending in the axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling 14 and counter to the first direction, illustrated by an arrow 36. For this purpose, the second switching element 34 can exert a second force on the second end disc 23 in the second actuating direction and via the second end disc 23 also on the disc pack 18, which second force is, for example, the aforementioned axial force or the aforementioned axial impact or functions as the aforementioned axial impact.” The specification fails to provide a written description that shows the inventor possessed the invention such as a second switching element as citied in claim 9.
Claim 15 discloses a claw switching element. The specification does not disclose the proper structure and how the second switching element works as claw switching element. The specification fails to provide a written description that shows the inventor possessed the invention as cited in claim 15.
An absence of details in the disclosure regarding how the inventor accomplishes a claimed function (e.g. switching) would give rise to a rejection for lack of written description. The ability of one skilled in the art to make and use the claimed invention does not satisfy the written description requirement if details of how the function is to be performed are not disclosed.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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 9-16 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 9, the claim limitation a first switching element and a second switching element renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear what the switching element is meant here and how it works. Does it mean a piston as first switching element or a counter pressure plate that poses pressure the clutch plate during disengagement as a second switching element. Therefore, the term switching element used in claim 9 is so unclear that it leaves the reader uncertain about the meaning of the technical feature in question. Clarification is required. For example, for the examination purpose any element that provide support in an actuation direction, and to provide support in an opening direction opposite to the actuation direction has been considered. Claim recites the limitation a support direction in line 13. Does it mean the second actuating direction? Clarification is required. For the examination purpose, a support direction is considered the direction opposite to the actuating direction.
Regarding claim 15, the claim limitation a claw switching element renders claim indefinite. It is not clear what is the claw switching element here since the specification and drawing do not provide sufficient information to understand this structure and function. Clarification is required. For the examination purpose any element with a claw structure has been considered as a claw switching element.
Regarding claim 16, the claim phrase “wherein the first and second switching elements are brake switching elements” render the claim indefinite. It is not clear what the brake switching element is meant to be here. Does it mean the multi-disk clutch could be a brake? The specification discloses in para 11 that “Compared to conventional solutions, the invention can increase the shifting comfort for the multiple-disc coupling that is designed as a multiple-disc brake”. Clarification is required. For the examination purpose, the multi-disc coupling is considered as a brake. It is suggested to rephrase the claim 16 such as “The transmission device of claim 9, wherein the multi-disc coupling is a multi-disc brake.
Claims 10-16 are rejected as they depend on claim 9.
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 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.
Claims 9-10, 12-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by BIETENBECK et al. (DE 102009014189 A1).
Regarding claim 9, BIETENBECK discloses a transmission device (figs. 1-3) for a drive train of a motor vehicle, the transmission device comprising:
a multiple-disc coupling (e.g. 26, fig. 1, para 27) comprising at least one disc carrier (e.g. 14, para 29) and a disc pack (e.g. 27) with a plurality of discs (e.g. 11, 12, 28, 29, 30 etc., fig. 1) arranged following each other in an axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling, wherein the plurality of discs include first (13, para 30) and second (10, para 31) end disks between which remaining discs of the plurality of disks are arranged;
a first switching element (e.g. 35, para 30, fig. 1) configured to actuate the disc pack via the first end disc (13) in an actuating direction (17, fig. 1) extending in the axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling;
and a second switching element (e.g. 25, paras 31, 36) arranged opposite the first switching element (35) in the axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling, wherein the second end disc (10) is supported directly on the at least one disc carrier (14, fig. 2) in a support direction (e.g. 16, fig. 2) extending in the axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling and counter to the actuating direction (17) and is supported directly on a component (e.g. has no character numeral, the part in touch with the second end disc 10 or see the annotated fig. A below) of the second support element (25) in the actuating direction,
wherein the plurality of discs of the disc pack (27, fig. 2) each have a first toothing (e.g. 24, fig. 2) engaging into a corresponding second toothing (20, para 29) of the at least one disc carrier (14) so that the plurality of discs of the disc pack (27) are supported on the disc carrier (14) in a circumferential direction of the multiple-disc coupling, (see para 29)
wherein the second toothing (20) has at least two teeth set back (e.g. see 23, 22 in fig. 2/3, paras 33-34) in the axial direction and forming a respective axial end face (e.g. step 21 or see the annotated fig. A below), and
wherein, on the respective axial end faces (e.g. pointed by arrow of step 21), corresponding teeth (e.g. has the similar numeral 24, see para 34, fig. 2) of the first toothing of the second end disc (10) are directly supported in the support direction (16). (see para 33 “To form the support element 18, the clutch plate carrier toothing 20 of the clutch plate binding unit 19 has a step 21 by means of which the support element 18 and thus a part of the clutch plate support means 15 is formed. The clutch plate carrier toothing 20 has a tooth circle diameter in a first sub-area 22 that is larger than a tooth circle diameter in a second sub-area 23 . The first sub-area 22 is intended for the arrangement of the coupling plate 10, which is designed as an end plate. The second sub-area 23 is intended for the remaining similar clutch plates 11, 12, 13.”
Please note: The second switching element 25 provides support in an opening direction 16 opposite to the actuation direction 17. See para 31” The clutch plate support means 15 is designed to provide support in the actuation direction 17, i.e., to dissipate the actuation force, and to provide support in an opening direction 16 opposite to the actuation direction 17, i.e., to support disturbance forces acting in the opposite direction to the actuation force”, and in para 36 “…. the clutch plate support means 15 has a second support element 25, which is designed separately from the clutch plate carrier 14.”
PNG
media_image1.png
672
749
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A: Annotated fig. 2 of BIETENBECK
Regarding claim 10, BIETENBECK discloses all the elements of claim 9, wherein the component supported directly on the second end disc in the support direction is supported in the actuating direction directly on a securing element (e.g. the part of the second switching element 25 attached to the recess step of 37 on right side or see the annotated fig. A above) fixed at least indirectly to a carrier element (e.g. has no character numeral, the housing as shown in fig. 1) of the transmission device in the axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling.
Please note: A securing element is considered as any element which can secure the other element directly or indirectly. It is suggested to change the limitation to a securing ring.
Regarding claim 12, BIETENBECK discloses all the elements of claim 9, wherein the teeth of the first toothing (24) of the second end disc (10) that are supported on the end faces each have a first extension, extending in the circumferential direction of the multiple-disc coupling, which is greater than a respective second extension of further teeth of the first toothing of the second end disc (10), wherein the second extension extends in the circumferential direction of the multiple-disc coupling. (see paras 33-35)
Regarding claim 13, BIETENBECK discloses all the elements of claim 12, wherein the teeth of the first toothing (24) of the second end disc (10) that are supported on the end faces are arranged evenly distributed in the circumferential direction of the multiple-disc coupling.
Regarding claim 16, BIETENBECK discloses all the elements of claim 12, wherein the first and second switching elements are brake switching elements. (Since the clutch plate carrier 14 is fixed to the housing as shown in fig. 1, the clutch 26 acts as a break as best understood.)
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 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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of COLEZE et al. (DE 102014214658 A1) in view of MITTELBERGER et al. (DE 102005042120 A1).
Regarding claim 11, BIETENBECK discloses all the elements of claim 9, but fails to disclose wherein the securing element is a wedge ring having two wedge faces facing away from each other in the axial direction of the multiple-disc coupling, wherein the two wedge faces extend outwards towards each other in a radial direction of the multiple-disc coupling.
MITTELBERGER teaches an axial fixing arrangement (figs. 1-3) wherein a wedge ring (3) having two wedges (3a, 2a) faces facing away from each other in an axial direction (e.g. F).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BIETENBECK by modifying the securing element as taught by MITTELBERGER such as a self-locking feature can be achieved. Further, it is a matter of engineering design to shape the ring in different ways, where the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected result, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (see MPEP § 2144.04). Finally, one would have a reasonable expectation of success by changing the shape of the ring to the claimed limitation as MITTELBERGER teaches this arrangement is a known and suitable arrangement in the art.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of COLEZE et al. (DE 102014214658 A1) in view of KOLZE et al. (DE 102007027120 B4).
Regarding claim 14, BIETENBECK discloses all the elements of claim 9, but fails to disclose wherein the component includes a third toothing, corresponding to the second toothing, that engages into the second toothing to support the component on the disc carrier in the circumferential direction of the multiple-disc coupling.
KOLZE teaches a similar kind of multi-disc coupling (e.g. K2, fig. 1) of a transmission device (1, figs. 1-4) wherein a component (e.g. 18, 20, fig. 1) includes a third toothing (23, fig. 3), corresponding to the second toothing 25), that engages into the second toothing to support the component (18) on the disc carrier (12) in the circumferential direction of the multiple-disc coupling (K2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BIETENBECK by substituting the second switching element as taught by KOLZE such as the engagement of the component of the second switching element with the disc carrier provides particularly robust axial support for the clutch pack, thus preventing discarding and therefore uneven pressure on the lamellar pack. (see para 7 of KOLZE)
Regarding claim 15, BIETENBECK discloses all the elements of claim 9, but fails to disclose wherein the second switching element is a claw switching element and the component is a carrier part of a claw switching element half of the claw switching element.
KOLZE teaches a similar kind of multi-disc coupling (e.g. K2, fig. 1) of a transmission device (1, figs. 1-4) wherein a support element (e.g. 18, 20, fig. 3) is a claw switching element (e.g. since element 18 has teeth 23 which engages with teeth 25 as shown in fig. 3) and the component (21, fig. 1) is a carrier part of a claw switching element half of the claw switching element (18).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BIETENBECK by substituting the second switching element as taught by KOLZE such as the engagement of the component of the second switching element with the disc carrier provides particularly robust axial support for the clutch pack, thus preventing discarding and therefore uneven pressure on the lamellar pack. (see para 7 of KOLZE)
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure.
Payne et al. (US 10797548 B2) discloses a clutch 18 includes a plurality of clutch plates 30, at least some of which are supported in an axially slidable manner at outer diameter ends thereof by splines 32 formed on an inner circumferential surface of axially extending section 28a. At least one of clutch plates 30 are supported in an axially slidable manner at inner diameter ends thereof by an inner support 34 that is fixed to a counter pressure plate 36, which is nonrotatably fixed to shaft 20. Clutch 18 further includes a piston 38 that is axially slidable along an outer circumference of shaft 20 to engage and disengage clutch 18 based on fluid pressure differences on front and rear sides of piston 38. When piston 38 forces clutch plates 30 against counter pressure plate 36, clutch 18 is engaged and torque from shaft 20 is transmitted through clutch plates 30 into rotor carrier hub 28, which then transmits the received torque to damper assembly 14. Piston 38 is held axially away from clutch plates 30 by a spring 40 supported by a support plate 42. Piston 38 is also resiliently connected to a liftoff control plate 43 that limits the liftoff of piston 38 with respect to clutch plates 30.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHANA PERVIN whose telephone number is (571)272-4644. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
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, Jacob S. Scott can be reached on 5712703415. 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.
/F.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/FARHANA PERVIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights