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 Office Action is in response to the amendment filed on September 8th, 2026 for application no. 19/261,186 filed on July 7th, 2025. Claims 1 and 3-14 are pending. In the present amendment, claims 1 and 12 are amended, and claims 2 and 15-20 are canceled.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the use of legal phraseology. Please remove “means” from the abstract. Correction is required. See MPEP 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Regarding Claim 4 (line 5), please change the recitation of “sliding sleeve is in a first axial position referred to as a connected position” to - - sliding sleeve is in a first axial position of the two axial positions referred to as a connected position - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 4 (lines 6-7), please change the recitation of “when the sliding sleeve is in a second axial position referred to as a disconnected position” to - - when the sliding sleeve is in a second axial position of the two axial positions referred to as a disconnected position - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 13 (line 3), please change the recitation of “collaborate rotationally with a traction motor/engine” to - - collaborate rotationally with [[a]] the traction motor/engine - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 1.
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 4-10 and 12 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 4 (lines 6-7), in the recitation of “uncoupling of the second wheel-driving half-shaft when the sliding sleeve is in a second axial position referred to as a disconnected position” it is unclear what feature the second wheel-driving half-shaft (Fig. 6, 4) is uncoupled from. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “uncoupling of the second wheel-driving half-shaft from the sliding sleeve when the sliding sleeve is in a second axial position of the two axial positions referred to as a disconnected position” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination.
Regarding Claim 12 (lines 3-5), in the recitation of “the sliding sleeve comprises first and second parts that are axially mobile relative to one another; the first part being configured to collaborate with the actuator” the difference between the “annular groove” recited in claim 11 (line 3) and the “first part” recited in claim 12 is unclear. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “the sliding sleeve comprises first and second parts that are axially mobile relative to one another, the first part serving as the annular groove; the first part being configured to collaborate with the actuator” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Claims 5-10 are rejected based upon their dependency to a rejected base claim.
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 1, 3-4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Borgen (US 6,659,249).
Regarding Claim 1, Borgen teaches a differential module (differential seen in Fig. 1) for a vehicle transmission system, the differential module having a first axis of rotation (main rotational axis through 24 and 25) and comprising:
a planet carrier (“differential case” 12) able to receive a torque supplied, directly or indirectly, by a traction motor/engine (see Fig. 1);
at least one planet pinion (18) pivotably mounted on the planet carrier (12);
a first and a second sun gear (“side gears” 20, 21) pivoting about the first axis of rotation (see Fig. 1);
a first and a second wheel-driving half-shaft (“output shaft” 24 and “universal joint” 50),
the first wheel-driving half-shaft (24) being rotationally connected to the first sun gear (20); and
a sliding sleeve (“output shaft” 25) able to move axially along the first axis of rotation between at least two distinct axial positions (col. 3, lines 32-41 – “the first and second output shafts 24, 25 are interconnected and axially slidable together as a unit. In other words, the present invention preferably provides a linking member 29 in the form of a linking rod or other suitable member that extends through the differential assembly to connect the two output shafts 24, 25. With this arrangement, the invention provides simultaneous axial movement of the output shafts to thereby mutually disconnect the first and second output shafts 24, 25 from the first and second universal joints 50, 60”);
wherein a first connection by means of collaborating shapes (splined connection seen in Fig. 1) is created directly between the sliding sleeve (25) and the second sun gear (21), the first connection by means of collaborating shapes being configured so that the sliding sleeve (25) is directly and permanently rotationally connected to the second sun gear (21) and so that the sliding sleeve (25) slides axially with respect to the second sun gear (21) between the at least two axial positions (see col. 3, lines 32-41),
and wherein the first connection by means of collaborating shapes (splined connection seen in Fig. 1) comprises a male spline formed on the sliding sleeve (25) and a female spline formed on the second sun gear (21; col. 3, lines 18-31 – “As with the conventional differential drive assembly, the dual disconnect axle assembly of this invention includes a coaxial first (or left-hand) output shaft 24 and a second (or right-hand) output shaft 25. These output shafts 24, 25 extend transversely and are coaxial with side gears 20, 21. These output shafts 24, 25 extend from inboard ends near cross pin 16 to outboard ends, which extend outside the differential housing. Splines (e.g. splines 25a, 50a) are provided at the inboard ends of universal joints 50, 60 for selectively driving the same and which may be conventional (e.g., universal joints) provided at respective outboard ends of output shafts 24, 25 and extend transversely outwardly to wheels (not shown) at the sides of the vehicle”).
Regarding Claim 3, Borgen teaches the differential module according to 1,
wherein a surface of the planet carrier (Fig. 1, 12) provides radial centering of a surface of the sliding sleeve (25).
Regarding Claim 4, Borgen teaches the differential module according to 1,
wherein a second connection by means of collaborating shapes (Figs. 1-2, “splines” 50a) is created between the sliding sleeve (25) and the second wheel-driving half-shaft (50) so as selectively to provide:
coupling of the second sun gear (21) to the second wheel-driving half-shaft (50) when the sliding sleeve (25) is in a first axial position referred to as a connected position (col. 3, line 57 – col 4, line 3 – “entire set of clutch members, including internally-splined inner member 50 of the universal joints and externally-splined output shafts 24, 25, are shown in clutch disengaging position in FIG. 1, being the normal position. Upon actuation, as will be described subsequently, the axially slidable output shafts 24, 25 slide to the left as seen in FIG. 1 into a clutch engaging position, in which clutch members or splines on respective universal joints 50, 60 are in engagement with respective splines on respective output shafts 24, 25. Output shafts 24, 25 rotate with respective universal joints 50, 60 when the clutch mechanism is in the clutch engaging position, and rotate independently of the respective universal joints 50, 60 when the clutch mechanism is in the clutch disengaging position”); and
uncoupling of the second wheel-driving half-shaft (50) when the sliding sleeve (25) is in a second axial position (position shown in Figs. 1-2) referred to as a disconnected position.
Regarding Claim 11, Borgen teaches the differential module according to Claim 1, wherein the sliding sleeve (Fig. 1, 25) is designed to be moved by an actuator (“known means” 41),
the sliding sleeve (25) comprising an annular groove (“groove” 38) that collaborates with a fork (“shift fork” 40) connected to the actuator (41; col. 4, lines 8-16 – “To actuate the clutch mechanism, a clutch actuator 40 may be provided as a shift fork having a bifurcated end portion which is received in groove 38 of clutch collar 36 fixedly provided on one of the output shafts. The shift fork 40 may be actuated by known means 41, e.g., by electrical (which is preferred) or by hydraulic, pneumatic, vacuum, or mechanical means. Actuation may be initiated either automatically or by a manual operator, such as a manual or pedal control in the vehicle cab”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borgen (US 6,659,249), in view of Doolittle (US 2018/0031102).
Regarding Claim 13, Borgen teaches the differential module according to Claim 1, a fixed structure (Fig. 1, “differential housing” 14) and an actuator (41) configured to move the sliding sleeve (25).
Borgen does not teach “a transmission system…a gearset configured to cause the differential module to collaborate rotationally with a traction motor/engine”. In other words, Borgen does not explicitly disclose a powertrain.
Doolittle teaches a transmission system (Fig. 1, “transmission system” 118 and “input shaft” 116),
a gearset (118) configured to cause a differential module (“differential assembly” 200) to collaborate rotationally with a traction motor/engine (“power source” 114).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the differential module taught by Borgen with the powertrain taught by Doolittle, such that “a transmission system…a gearset configured to cause the differential module to collaborate rotationally with a traction motor/engine”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in combining known elements, and have the obvious advantage of reliably powering the differential module taught by Borgen.
Regarding Claim 14, Borgen and Doolittle teach the transmission system according to Claim 13,
Doolittle teaches a powertrain (Fig. 1; 114, 118, 116) comprising the traction motor/engine (114) and the transmission system (118, 116) according to Claim 13.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant's arguments filed September 8th, 2026 are in response to the Office Action mailed June 8th, 2026 and the interview conducted on August 18th, 2026. Examiner acknowledges the subject matter of claim 2 has been incorporated with independent claim 1. The Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Response to Claim Objections
Regarding Claim 20, Applicant’s amendment addresses a minor informality indicated in the previous Office Action. As such, the claim objection is withdrawn.
Response to Double Patenting Rejections
Regarding Claims 1, 4-14 and 20, the terminal disclaimer filed on September 8th, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 19/261,297 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded. As such, the nonstatutory doubling patenting rejections of claims 1, 4-14 and 20 are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Regarding Claim 12, Applicant’s amendment has not clarified the invention. See new 112(b) rejection necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
Response to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and/or 103
Regarding Claim 1, Applicant has recited features that distinguish from those taught by the prior art of Averill (US 6,432,021) and Schroeder (US 2014/0274542); however, the claimed invention is still anticipated by the prior art of record. See detailed and relevant rejections presented above.
In conclusion, amended claims 1 and 3-14 are rejected. See detailed and relevant rejections set forth above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-10 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office Action and rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for allowance, if applicable, will be the subject of a separate communication to the Applicant or patent owner, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.104 and MPEP § 1302.14.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, Applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The prior art of Gross (US 2,638,797), Pickering (US 1,511,908), Asahi (US 7,056,256), Iwata (US 4,779,698), De Witt (US 1,145,295) listed in the attached "Notice of References Cited" disclose similar differential modules with clutches related to various aspects of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James J. Taylor II whose telephone number is (571)272-4074. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, 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.
JAMES J. TAYLOR II
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655
/JAMES J TAYLOR II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights