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 .
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 9 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 9 recites “wherein the plain bearing comprises a protruding annular portion of the sun gearwheel or of the first drive shaft.” However the sun gearwheel is a distinct element from the bearing. The first drive shaft is also a distinct element from the bearing. As such, these cannot be both distinct elements and also portions of the same element.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-13, 15, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gowrisankar (US 2022/80388391) in view of Laforce et al. (US 2022/0268349; hereinafter “Laforce”).
Claim 1
Gowrisankar discloses an electric axle assembly for a vehicle, comprising:
a planetary gearset (131, 132, 134, 136, 138) comprising a sun gearwheel (132), a planet carrier (134) carrying a plurality of planet gearwheels (136), and a ring gearwheel (138);
a first drive shaft (110) rotatably passing through the sun gearwheel (132); and
a first gear engaging device (165) configured to selectively engage or disengage the sun gearwheel (132) to respectively enable or disable torque transfer via the planetary gearset to the first drive shaft (110), wherein the sun gearwheel (132), when disengaged, is not supported against any fixed component apart from the planetary gearset.
Gowrisankar does not disclose wherein a plain bearing is arranged between the sun gearwheel and the first drive shaft. However, Laforce discloses wherein a plain bearing (320) is arranged between the sun gearwheel (350) and the first drive shaft (316) (see FIG. 3 and paragraph [0047] describing the bearing as a race or a cylinder). 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 Gowrisankar to have added a race type or cylinder type bearing, which is a plain bearing, inside the sun gear as taught by Laforce in order to prevent the shafts inside the motor and the planetary gearset in FIG. 1 of Gowrisankar from bending or radially misaligning relative to the drive shaft.
Claim 2
Gowrisankar as modified discloses wherein the plain bearing (Laforce, 320) is configured to (necessarily functions to) limit misalignment of the sun gearwheel (Gowrisankar, 132; Laforce, 350) relative to the first drive shaft (Gowrisankar, 110; Laforce, 316) when the sun gearwheel is disengaged.
Claim 3
Gowrisankar as modified discloses wherein the plain bearing (Laforce, 320) comprises a first bearing surface (outer surface of Laforce, 320) provided on the sun gearwheel (Gowrisankar, 132; Laforce, 350) and a second bearing surface ( provided on the first drive shaft, and wherein the plain bearing is configured such that the first and second bearing surfaces are not in contact with one another when the sun gearwheel is engaged by the first gear engaging device.
Claim 4
Gowrisankar as modified discloses wherein a diameter difference between the first and second bearing surfaces is sufficiently large to allow centering of the sun gearwheel by gear mesh forces applied by the planet gearwheels, when the sun gearwheel is engaged and torque is transferred via the planetary gearset to the first drive shaft. A rejection may be made when the prior art seems to be identical as that of the claim, in this case a plain bearing between a sun gear and drive shaft, but the function is not explicitly disclosed by the reference (see MPEP 2112(III)). In this case, a bearing added inside the sun gear of Gowrisankar against the axle shaft there through would prevent the sun gear from moving radially which would necessarily center the sun gear. In other words, without a bearing the sun gear would have space to move radially into positions that are not centered on the axle shaft, however with a bearing therebetween such movement would be prevented. Thus, the recited centering function in the claim is a nature result of the combination of prior art elements that are proposed by Examiner. In addition, the structural similarities of the planetary gearset positioned on the axle shaft in both the Applicant’s invention and in Gowrisankar would result in the same forces on the sun gear as to the drive shaft in both Applicant’s invention and Gowrisankar.
Claim 8
Gowrisankar as modified discloses wherein the plain bearing (Laforce, 320) comprises a ring member (axially extending portion of Laforce 320) attached to an inner peripheral surface of the sun gearwheel, or to an outer peripheral surface of the first drive shaft (see Laforce, FIG. 3).
Claim 9
As best understood, Gowrisankar as modified discloses wherein the plain bearing (Laforce, 320) comprises a protruding annular portion of the sun gearwheel (Gowrisankar, 132; Laforce, 350) or of the first drive shaft (Gowrisankar, 110; Laforce, 316). Either the sun gear can be interpreted as including both the sun gear and the bearing or the drive shaft can be interpreted as including both the drive shaft and the bearing.
Claim 10
Gowrisankar discloses wherein the sun gearwheel (Gowrisankar, 132; Laforce, 350), when engaged, is supported against a fixed component (161) via at least the first gear engaging device (165) (see FIG. 1).
Claim 11
Gowrisankar discloses wherein the first gear engaging device (165) is configured to be set to one of three positions, comprising: an engaged first position (FIG. 1, left position) in which it engages the sun gearwheel (132) to a fixed component (161) and in which power transfer via the ring gearwheel is enabled, a disengaged second position (FIG. 1, middle position) in which it disengages the sun gearwheel (132) and no torque transfer is possible, and an engaged third position (FIG. 1, right position) in which it engages the sun gearwheel (132) to an input component (120) configured to be drivingly connected to an electric machine (118).
Claim 12
Gowrisankar discloses a second gear engaging device (175) configured to selectively engage the ring gearwheel (138) to one of the input component (120) (right position of 175) and a fixed component (173) (left position of 175), or to disengage the ring gearwheel (FIG. 1, middle position of 175).
Claim 13
Gowrisankar discloses wherein the first and second gear engaging devices are configured to together provide three selectable gear ratios and a neutral gear (see paragraph [0030] and [0066]; see also FIG. 1).
Claim 15
Gowrisankar discloses a differential gearset (128) configured to distribute torque between the first drive shaft (110) and a second drive shaft (112).
Claim 17
Gowrisankar discloses a vehicle (100) comprising the electric axle assembly according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).
Claim 18
Gowrisankar discloses wherein the first drive shaft (110) is arranged for driving at least one ground engaging member (106) of the vehicle (see FIG. 1).
Claim(s) 5, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gowrisankar in view of Laforce and further in view of Morioka (DE 112019006865T5).
Claim 5
Gowrisankar does not disclose wherein a diameter difference between the first and second bearing surfaces is at least 0.4 millimeter (mm). However, Morioka discloses a thickness of a plain bearing may be 0.5 to 18 mm (see machine translation portion of Morioka, page 3, second to last full paragraph).
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 further modified Gowrisankar such that in incorporating a bearing into Gowrisankar, to have made the bearing 0.5 mm since this is a recognized result-effective variable according to Morioka and in addition the thickness of 0.5 mm is disclosed by Morioka as a known typical thickness of a bearing that would yield predictable results.
Claim 7
Gowrisankar does not disclose wherein a diameter difference between the first and second bearing surfaces is less than or equal to 1 millimeter (mm). However, Morioka discloses a thickness of a plain bearing may be 0.5 to 18 mm (see machine translation portion of Morioka, page 3, second to last full paragraph).
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 further modified Gowrisankar such that in incorporating a bearing into Gowrisankar, to have made the bearing 0.5 mm (which is less than 1 mm) since this is a recognized result-effective variable according to Morioka and in addition the thickness of 0.5 mm is disclosed by Morioka as a known typical thickness of a bearing that would yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gowrisankar in view of Laforce and further in view of Haupt (DE 102008043280A1).
Claim 6
Gowrisankar does not disclose wherein a diameter difference between the first and second bearing surfaces is sufficiently small to prevent two-flank contact between meshing surfaces of the sun gearwheel and the planet gearwheels when the sun gearwheel is disengaged. While this function relates to much more than only the thickness of the bearing, the result of preventing a two-flank contact between gear teeth of a planetary gearset is well recognized in the prior art. For example, Haupt discloses a bearing may be provided that effect radial forces and “prevents a two-flank contact in the area of gear teeth between an internal gear and planet gears of a planetary gear set” (see Abstract, “ADVANTAGE” section).
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 Gowrisankar to have designed the entirety of the arrangement including the bearing thickness, i.e., a diameter difference between the first and second bearing surfaces, such that a diameter difference between the first and second bearing surfaces at any point is prevented in order to provide quitter operation and improve durability and efficiency.
Claim(s) 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gowrisankar in view of Laforce and further in view of Pritchard et al. (DE 102017104674A1; hereinafter “Pritchard”).
Claim 14
Gowrisankar discloses comprising an electric machine (118, 122) configured to be drivingly connected to the planetary gearset, but does not disclose wherein the electric machine has an output shaft oriented in parallel with and radially offset from the first drive shaft. However, Pritchard discloses an electric drive where the electric machine (86) is offset radially from the first drive shaft (axle shaft inside 97) (see FIG. 1)
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 Gowrisankar to have moved the motor to be offset from the axle in order to provide an axially more condensed arrangement. The choice between whether to place the motor coaxial or offset is an obvious design choice where one option is radially condensed and the other option is axially condensed.
Claim 16
Gowrisankar discloses that the output from the planetary gearset is the carrier but a second planetary gearset (146, 148, 142) is between the main planetary gearset and the differential gearset. However, Pritchard discloses the output carrier (97) is directly connected for common rotation with the differential planet carrier (22) (see FIG. 1). 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 Gowrisankar to eliminate the second planetary gearset and instead connect the planetary gearset (131, 132, 134, 136, 138) directly to the differential in order to provide a cheaper and simpler transmission.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2024/0263691 discloses a bearing between a sun gear 12 and the casing of a differential 49. US 20220196149 discloses a planetary gearset that includes a bearing inside the sun gear. DE 102011100816A1 discloses a roller bearing 94 between a sun gear and drive shaft.
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
Prosecution Insights