CTFR 19/176,275 CTFR 92638 DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Amendment The amendment filed 01/20/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-6 and 9-11 remain pending in the application. 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, a wire connector to extract detection information from the resolver, the wire connector being on a front-to-rear wall of a peripheral wall of the transmission case…the transmission case includes the peripheral wall through which a rotary shaft of the motor generator is inserted , as required by claim 1; the resolver is between a housing of the motor generator and the peripheral wall in an extending direction of the rotary shaft , as required by claim 1; the resolver includes a stator supported by the peripheral wall , as required by claim 1; the peripheral wall includes at least one support protruding toward the resolver and supporting the stator , as required by claim 3; the at least one support includes a plurality of supports at a plurality of locations on the peripheral wall that are dispersed in a circumferential direction of the rotor , as required by claim 4; a joint bolt joining the stator to the at least one support by being inserted through the stator in a direction along an axis of the rotary shaft from a side opposite to a side where the peripheral wall is located relative to the stator , as required by claim 5; a motor support supporting the housing of the motor generator and located at a portion of the peripheral wall that is on a side opposite to a side where the rotary shaft is located relative to the at least one support in a diameter direction of the rotary shaft , as required by claim 6; a wire fixing section on the peripheral wall to fix the electric wire , as required by claim 9; the electric wire extends along an inner wall surface of the peripheral wall , as required by claim 10; and a wire fixing section to fix the electric wire, the wire fixing section being on the inner wall surface the peripheral wall , as required by claim 11, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 06-22 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 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. 07-31-01 Claims 1, 3-6 and 9-11 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(s) 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 1 recites the limitations “the transmission case includes the peripheral wall through which a rotary shaft of the motor generator is inserted”, “the resolver is between a housing of the motor generator and the peripheral wall in an extending direction of the rotary shaft” and “the resolver includes a stator supported by the peripheral wall”; claim 3 recites the limitation “the peripheral wall includes at least one support protruding toward the resolver and supporting the stator”; claim 4 recites the limitation “the at least one support includes a plurality of supports at a plurality of locations on the peripheral wall that are dispersed in a circumferential direction of the rotor”; claim 5 recites the limitation “a joint bolt joining the stator to the at least one support by being inserted through the stator in a direction along an axis of the rotary shaft from a side opposite to a side where the peripheral wall is located relative to the stator”; claim 6 recites the limitation “a motor support supporting the housing of the motor generator and located at a portion of the peripheral wall that is on a side opposite to a side where the rotary shaft is located relative to the at least one support in a diameter direction of the rotary shaft”; claim 9 recites the limitation “a wire fixing section on the peripheral wall to fix the electric wire”; claim 10 recites the limitation “the electric wire extends along an inner wall surface of the peripheral wall”; and claim 11 recites the limitation “a wire fixing section to fix the electric wire, the wire fixing section being on the inner wall surface the peripheral wall”. These limitations lack support in the originally filed specification and are therefore considered new matter. MPEP 2173.01 states “A fundamental principle contained in 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph is that applicants are their own lexicographers. They can define in the claims what the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention essentially in whatever terms they choose so long as any special meaning assigned to a term is clearly set forth in the specification”. MPEP 2173.01(I) reads “Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms. The presumption that a term is given its ordinary and customary meaning may be rebutted by the applicant by clearly setting forth a different definition of the term in the specification. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1028 (Fed. Cir. 1997).” In this instance, the specification fails to set forth any special definition of the term “peripheral” and it therefore must be given its ordinary and customary meaning. Merriam-Webster defines periphery as “the external boundary or surface of a body”. Additionally, paragraph [0063] reads “The transmission case 13 includes a peripheral wall 90 including a rear longitudinal wall 91…and a front-to-rear wall 92…the front-to-rear wall 92 includes a bottom wall 92a…an upper wall portion 92b…and lateral walls 92c”, while Fig. 4 shows walls 92a, 92b and 92c as peripheral walls. The disclosure is clear that the meaning of peripheral in the specification and claims is consistent with the ordinary and customary meaning, i.e., an external wall. Therefore, the limitations noted above are considered new matter. 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. 07-34-01 AIA Claim s 1, 3-6 and 9-11 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. Claim 1 recites the limitations “the transmission case includes the peripheral wall through which a rotary shaft of the motor generator is inserted”, “the resolver is between a housing of the motor generator and the peripheral wall in an extending direction of the rotary shaft” and “the resolver includes a stator supported by the peripheral wall”; claim 3 recites the limitation “the peripheral wall includes at least one support protruding toward the resolver and supporting the stator”; claim 4 recites the limitation “the at least one support includes a plurality of supports at a plurality of locations on the peripheral wall that are dispersed in a circumferential direction of the rotor”; claim 5 recites the limitation “a joint bolt joining the stator to the at least one support by being inserted through the stator in a direction along an axis of the rotary shaft from a side opposite to a side where the peripheral wall is located relative to the stator”; claim 6 recites the limitation “a motor support supporting the housing of the motor generator and located at a portion of the peripheral wall that is on a side opposite to a side where the rotary shaft is located relative to the at least one support in a diameter direction of the rotary shaft”; claim 9 recites the limitation “a wire fixing section on the peripheral wall to fix the electric wire”; claim 10 recites the limitation “the electric wire extends along an inner wall surface of the peripheral wall”; and claim 11 recites the limitation “a wire fixing section to fix the electric wire, the wire fixing section being on the inner wall surface the peripheral wall”. It is unclear how the above limitations are directed toward a peripheral wall, when the wall which the limitations are directed is not a peripheral wall. As such, the scope of the claims cannot be determined. Accordingly, from the above, the claims and disclosure are generally narrative and indefinite, appearing to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document. A great deal of confusion and uncertainty exists as to the proper interpretation of the claim limitations. In accordance with MPEP § 2173 the examiner has applied the prior art elsewhere below under 35 U.S.C. 102 and/or 103 in as best as the claims can be understood in the interest of compact prosecution. See In re Wilson , 424 F.2d 1382, 1385 (CCPA 1970); In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 1, 3-6 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hata (US 5875691 A) in view of Seguchi (US 5744895 A) . Regarding claim 1, Hata discloses a work vehicle (see column 1 lines 66-67, wherein a vehicle is disclosed) comprising: an engine (see Fig. 7; 900) ; a transmission (E) configured to change a speed of motive power from the engine to output the motive power to a travel device (see column 7 line 10, wherein wheels are disclosed) ; a transmission case (see Fig. 8; 100) housing the transmission; a motor generator (101) joined to the transmission; a resolver (127) configured to detect a rotation speed of the motor generator; a front-to-rear wall (105) of a peripheral wall of the transmission case, the front-to-rear wall extending in a front-to-rear direction of a vehicle body (see Fig. 8 and 10, wherein 105 extends in the forward direction) ; wherein the transmission case includes the peripheral wall through which a rotary shaft (171) of the motor generator is inserted; the resolver is between a housing of the motor generator (123, inner portion of 105) and the peripheral wall in an extending direction of the rotary shaft (see Fig. 7-8) ; the resolver includes a rotor (129) fitted onto the rotary shaft (see Fig. 8) ; the resolver includes a stator (130) supported by the peripheral wall (see Fig. 8). Hata fails to disclose a wire connector to extract detection information from the resolver, the wire connector being on the front-to-rear wall; and an electric wire connecting the resolver and the wire connector; and the electric wire extends along the peripheral wall . However, Seguchi teaches a wire connector (see Fig. 20; 1711) to extract detection information from the resolver (1912) , the wire connector being on the front-to-rear wall (1710) ; and an electric wire (wire from 1912 to 500) connecting the resolver and the wire connector (see Fig. 20) ; and the electric wire extends along the peripheral wall (see Fig. 20; 1710a). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Hata with wire connectors to extract detection information from the resolver, as taught by Seguchi, to connect the resolver to a control unit to control rotational speed of a rotor (see column 5 line 67 to column 6 line 3) to provide a system for converting electric power of a battery and mechanical power of an engine into driving power of an output shaft at a prescribed rotating torque and rotational speed (see column 2 lines 5-9). Regarding claim 3, Hata discloses the peripheral wall (114) includes at least one support (portion of 114 comprising 131) protruding toward the resolver (127) and supporting the stator (130). Regarding claim 4, Hata discloses the at least one support (portion of 114 comprising 131) includes a plurality of supports (portion of 114 comprising upper 131, portion of 114 comprising lower 131) at a plurality of locations (top and bottom in the figure) on the peripheral wall (114) that are dispersed in a circumferential direction of the rotor (129). Regarding claim 5, Hata discloses a joint bolt (131) joining the stator (130) to the at least one support (portion of 114 comprising 131) by being inserted through the stator in a direction along an axis (F) of the rotary shaft (117) from a side (right side in the figure) opposite to a side (left side in the figure) where the peripheral wall (114) is located relative to the stator (130). Regarding claim 6, Hata discloses a motor support (159) supporting the housing of the motor generator (101) and located at a portion of the peripheral wall (portion of 114) that is on a side (bottom side in the figure) opposite to a side (top side in the figure) where the rotary shaft (117) is located relative to the at least one support (portion of 114 comprising 131) in a diameter direction of the rotary shaft (up/down direction in the figure). Regarding claim 9, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: a wire fixing section (Seguchi; section of 1730 that the wire passes through) on the peripheral wall (Seguchi; vertical wall of 1710 comprising 1510) to fix the electric wire (Seguchi; wire from 1912 to 500). Regarding claim 10, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the electric wire (Seguchi; wire from 1912 to 500) extends along an inner wall surface of the peripheral wall (Seguchi; vertical wall of 1710 comprising 1510). Regarding claim 11, the combination of claim 1 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: a wire fixing section (Seguchi; section of 1730 that the wire passes through) to fix the electric wire (Seguchi; wire from 1912 to 500) , the wire fixing section being on the inner wall surface the peripheral wall (Seguchi; vertical wall of 1710 comprising 1510) . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 04/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding Applicant’s argument that the Examiner does not identify or explain which specific feature of Hata corresponds to the housing of the motor-generator, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. In the Non-Final Office Action of 01/20/206 and the rejection above, the housing of the motor-generator explicitly maps to element 123 . Regarding Applicant’s argument that Hata’s flange 114 cannot reasonably be interpreted as corresponding to the peripheral wall through which a rotary shaft of the motor generator is inserted, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The end face portion 114 is provided in the transmission housing 100 and is therefore considered a wall of the transmission case. Regarding Applicant’s argument that Seguchi does not disclose a “peripheral wall through which the rotational shaft (F) of the motor-generator (101) passes”, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. As can be seen in Fig. 20, Seguchi discloses a wall 1710a, which a rotational shaft 1213 of the motor-generator 1000. Regarding Applicant’s argument that the coils (121) provided above and below the resolver (127) would interfere with the wiring, making it impossible to realize the configuration of “the electric wire extends along the peripheral wall”, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Second, MPEP 2141.03(I) states "A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). "[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle." Id. at 420, 82 USPQ2d 1397. Office personnel may also take into account "the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ." In this instance, the combination of prior art would have suggested all the elements of claim 1 to one having ordinary skill in the art. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 5:00pm 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-357-2384. 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. /JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 2 Art Unit: 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 3 Art Unit: 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 4 Art Unit: 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 5 Art Unit: 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 6 Art Unit: 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 7 Art Unit: 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 8 Art Unit: 3618 Application/Control Number: 19/176,275 Page 9 Art Unit: 3618
Prosecution Insights