Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 19/285,831

WAVE GEAR DRIVE

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Jul 30, 2025
Priority
Feb 06, 2025 — RE 10-2025-0015183
Examiner
MACARTHUR, VICTOR L
Art Unit
3618
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 12m
Est. Remaining
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allowance Rate
712 granted / 1076 resolved
+14.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1112
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§102
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§112
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1076 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 is unclear as to which previously recited element the limitation “thereof”. Claim 6 recites “a radius of curvature of the first region and a radius of curvature of the second region are smaller than a radius of curvature of the third region along a circular cross-section” is unclear as to what circular cross-section (singular) has multiple regions with multiple different radius of curvatures. Applicant’s third region (R3 in fig.7) appears to be axially flat rather than curved and is distinct from regions R1 and R2 (i.e., R1, R2 and R3 do not appear to exist “along a circular cross-section”). For purposes of applying the prior art elsewhere below, the examiner interprets a flat surface to have an infinitely large radius of curvature. See MPEP 2173.03 which states that a claim may be "indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty. Claims 9, 10, 12 and 13 recite the limitations “depth” and “height” in a relative manner without reference frame thereby rendering the claims unclear. Note that the 6/18/2026 amendment additions of directions fail to clarify the claims since the directions are not recited in relation to any particular element nor defined to have any specific boundaries (e.g., in a radial direction of what element? depth/height of portion extending from what beginning to what end?). See MPEP 2173.05(b). Claim 11 is unclear as to which previously recited element the limitation “thereof”. The remaining claims depend from the above and are thus similarly unclear/rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsubone JP2022183468. Claim 1 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). A wave gear drive, comprising: a wave generator (31) comprising a shaft (shaft of 31) and a flexible bearing (32); a flex spline (21) accommodating the wave generator; and a circular spline (10) accommodating the flex spline, wherein the flex spline comprises a cylindrical portion (211) into which the wave generator is disposed, a flange portion (22), and a curved portion (212, 213, 214) recessed inwardly from an outermost surface thereof (outermost surface of 72) to connect an end portion of the cylindrical portion (end portion of 211) to the flange portion, and wherein the curved portion comprises regions (212, 213, 214) with different radii of curvature. Claim 2. The wave gear drive of claim 1, wherein the regions comprise a first region (214) adjacent to the flange portion and a second region (212, 213 and/or curve joining 212 to 213) adjacent to the cylindrical portion. Claim 3. The wave gear drive of claim 2, wherein a radius of curvature of the first region (ROC of 214) is smaller than a radius of curvature of the second region (ROC at curve where 212 joins to 213; or ROC at 212 being infinite noting the 35 USC 112 rejection). Claim 4. The wave gear drive of claim 2, wherein the first region has a curved contour (curved contour of 214), and the second region has an inclined contour (contour of incline 212 or 213). Claim 5. The wave gear drive of claim 2, wherein the regions further comprise a third region (212) disposed between the first region (214) and the second region (curve joining 212 to 213). Claim 6 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). The wave gear drive of claim 5, wherein a radius of curvature of the first region (radius of curvature of 214) and a radius of curvature of the second region (radius of curvature of curve joining 212 to 213) are smaller than a radius of curvature of the third region (212 being straight has an infinitely large radius of curvature, see 35 USC 112 rejection) along a circular cross-section. Claim 7. The wave gear drive of claim 5, wherein the first region (214) and the second region (curve joining 212 to 213) have curved contours, and the third region (212) has a linear contour. Claim 8. The wave gear drive of claim 7, wherein a radius of curvature of the first region (radius of curvature of 214) is smaller than a radius of curvature of the second region (radius of curvature of curve joining 212 to 213). Claim 9. The wave gear drive of claim 1, wherein a depth (thickness of 212, 213, 214) of the curved portion extending in a radial direction is 1/2 or less of a height (axial length of 212, 213, 214) of the curved portion extending in an axial direction of the cylindrical portion. Claim 11 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). A wave gear drive, comprising: a wave generator (31, 32) comprising a shaft (shaft of 31) and a flexible bearing (32); a flex spline (21) accommodating the wave generator; and a circular spline (10) accommodating the flex spline, wherein the flex spline comprises a cylindrical portion (211) into which the wave generator is disposed, a flange portion (22), and a curved portion (212, 213, 214) disposed between the flange portion and an end portion (end of 211 joined to 213) of the cylindrical portion, and wherein the curved portion has a concave contour (concave contour of 214 or curve joining 212 to 213) on an outermost surface thereof (outside surface of 212, 213, 214) axially abut the end portion. Claim 12 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). The wave gear drive of claim 11, wherein a depth (thickness of 212, 213, 214) of the curved portion extending in the radial direction is 1/2 or less of a height (axial height of 212, 213, 214) of the curved portion extending in an axial direction of the cylindrical portion. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hashimoto US5860331. Claim 1 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). A wave gear drive, comprising: a wave generator (13/17 and/or 14/18) comprising a shaft (13 and/or 14) and a flexible bearing (17 and/or 18); a flex spline (21 and/or 22) accommodating the wave generator; and a circular spline (15 and/or 16) accommodating the flex spline, wherein the flex spline comprises a cylindrical portion (12e) into which the wave generator is disposed, a flange portion (12a), and a curved portion (12c) recessed inwardly (12c is recessed inwardly where it connects to 12a) from an outermost surface thereof (outermost surface of 12c) to connect an end portion of the cylindrical portion (end portion of 12e is connected to 12a by 12c) to the flange portion, and wherein the curved portion comprises regions (regions of 12c having different radii of curvature) with different radii of curvature. Claim 2. The wave gear drive of claim 1, wherein the regions comprise a first region (see region “A” in the examiner’s marked-up version of fig.2 below) adjacent to the flange portion and a second region (region including any one or more of “B”, “C” and/or region extending left from “B” to 12e) adjacent to the cylindrical portion. Marked-up version of figure 2 of Hashimoto PNG media_image1.png 410 510 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim 3. The wave gear drive of claim 2, wherein a radius of curvature of the first region (“A” above) is smaller than a radius of curvature of the second region (“B” above, or region left from “B” to 12e). Claim 4. The wave gear drive of claim 2, wherein the first region (“A” above) has a curved contour, and the second region (“C” above) has an inclined contour. Claim 5. The wave gear drive of claim 2, wherein the regions further comprise a third region (“C” above) disposed between the first region (“A” above) and the second region (“B” above, or region extending left from “B” to 12e). Claim 6 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). The wave gear drive of claim 5, wherein a radius of curvature of the first region (“A” above) and a radius of curvature of the second region (“B” above) are smaller than a radius of curvature of the third region (“C” being straight has an infinitely large radius of curvature) along a circular cross-section. Claim 7. The wave gear drive of claim 5, wherein the first region (“A” above) and the second region (“B” above) have curved contours, and the third region (“C” above) has a linear contour. Claim 8. The wave gear drive of claim 7, wherein a radius of curvature of the first region (“A” above) is smaller than a radius of curvature of the second region (“B” above, or region extending left from “B” to 12e). Claim 9 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). The wave gear drive of claim 1, wherein a depth (depth of thickness of 12c) of the curved portion extending in a radial direction is 1/2 or less of a height (axial height of 12c, or radial height of 12c) of the curved portion extending in an axial direction of the cylindrical portion. Claim 10 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). The wave gear drive of claim 1, wherein a height of the curved portion (axial height of rightmost curve of 12c as seen in fig.2) extending in an axial direction of the cylindrical portion is 80% or less of a height of the cylindrical portion (axial height of cylindrical portion of 12 connecting 12b to 12c) in the axial direction excluding an external gear (excluding/subtracting the axial height of either of 21a and/or 22a) disposed outside of the cylindrical portion. Claim 11 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). A wave gear drive, comprising: a wave generator (13/17 and/or 14/18) comprising a shaft (13 and/or 14) and a flexible bearing (17 and/or 18); a flex spline (21 and/or 22) accommodating the wave generator; and a circular spline (15 and/or 16) accommodating the flex spline, wherein the flex spline comprises a cylindrical portion (12e) into which the wave generator is disposed, a flange portion (12a), and a curved portion (12c) disposed between the flange portion and an end portion (end of 12e abutting 12c) of the cylindrical portion, and wherein the curved portion has a concave contour (concave contour of 12c) on an outermost surface thereof (outside surface of 12c is outermost relative to the inside surface of 12c) axially abut the end portion. Claim 12 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). The wave gear drive of claim 11, wherein a depth (depth of thickness of 12c, between outer and inner surfaces of 12c) of the curved portion extending in the radial direction is 1/2 or less of a height (axial height of 12c) of the curved portion extending in an axial direction of the cylindrical portion. Claim 13 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 clarity rejections). The wave gear drive of claim 11, wherein a height of the curved portion (axial height of rightmost curve of 12c as seen in fig.2) extending in an axial direction of the cylindrical portion is 80% or less of a height of the cylindrical portion (axial height of cylindrical portion of 12 connecting 12b to 12c) in the axial direction excluding an external gear (excluding/subtracting the axial height of either of 21a and/or 22a) formed on the outside of the cylindrical portion. Response to Arguments Applicant argues that the 6/18/2026 amendment overcomes the 35 USC 112 clarity rejections. This is not persuasive. The claims remain unclear as is detailed in the reworded rejections above. Applicant argues that the amendments to the independent claims 1 and 11 overcome the 35 USC 102 anticipation by Hashimoto. This is not persuasive. Hashimoto remains anticipatory of the newly amended claims as is detailed in the reworded rejections above. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 30, 2025
Application Filed
Apr 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Jun 18, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 04, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704169
APPARATUS WITH A DUAL-CLUTCH GEARBOX FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE
1y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12692921
BALL-SCREW DRIVE FOR ELECTROMECHANICAL BRAKE
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12686265
Positive Drive Differential
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686113
BENDING STRUCTURE BODY
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12673412
Robot
1y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+13.1%)
3y 0m (~1y 12m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1076 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month