`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-88 Filed 10/25/23 Page 1 of 6 PagelD #: 28916
`
`EXHIBIT 85
`EXHIBIT 85
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-88 Filed 10/25/23 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 28917
`
`815104
`
`I Of
`
`ratAtobiumwsitrininstt pimgEnsi simmArlonght
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`September 21 2021
`
`THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ANNEXED IS A TRUE COPY FROM THE
`RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE OF THE FILE WRAPPER AND CONTENTS
`OF
`
`APPLICATION NUMBER 15934603
`FILING DATE March 23 2018
`PATENT NUMBER RE48268
`ISSUE DATE October 20 2020
`
`avr oF
`
`Certified by
`
`Under Secretary of Commerce
`for intellectual Property
`and Director of the United States
`Patent and Trademark Office
`
`WA
`
`0007038
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-88 Filed 10/25/23 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 28918
`
`Reissue Of 8408659
`Issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`date of the 659 patent a routine matter for a POSITA See Yur
`
`Declaration at paragraph 46 and the supporting evidence cited
`
`therein See Busley Declaration at paragraphs 3138
`
`5 A POSITA would have understood the disclosure as describing an
`
`example of supports of higher spring stiffness as a rigid
`
`mounting This would be understood by a POSITA as describing
`
`the typical rigid mounting of drive train components by bolting
`
`those components to the machine frame without
`
`the use of an
`
`elastomeric element See Yur Declaration at paragraph 45 and 47
`
`48 and the supporting evidence cited therein See Busley
`
`Declaration at paragraphs 2627
`
`Again it must be remembered that the issues raised by the written
`
`description rejection are determined by what a POSITA would have understood
`
`from the original disclosure Both Mr Busley and Mr Yur have provided
`
`substantial
`
`information about
`
`the background knowledge of the POSITA that would
`
`influence the POSITAs understanding of the disclosure found in the 659 patent
`
`See citations to the Busley and Yur declarations in the summary above
`
`It is also significant
`
`to note that Mr Busleys testimony and corroborating
`
`documents referred to by him clearly show that the inventors were in actual
`
`possession of the invention as claimed and that these features were included in
`
`54
`
`WA
`
`0012890
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-88 Filed 10/25/23 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 28919
`
`ApplicationControl Number 15934603
`Art Unit 3993
`
`Page 3
`
`Add the following new paragraph between lines 42 and 43 of column 5
`
`As shown in Fig 2 an output axis of the drive engine 10 is aligned with an input
`
`axis of the clutch 14 and with an input axis of the drive pulley 11 prior to operation of
`
`the construction machine The articulated coupling device 20 accommodates a lack of
`
`precise alignment between the output axis of the drive engine 10 and the input axes of
`
`the clutch 14 and the drive pulley 11 due to dynamic movement of the drive engine
`
`10 relative to the second group 5 during operation of the construction machine
`
`IN THE CLAIMS
`
`Amend claims 1 8 12 14 22 29 30 32 33 and 35 as follows
`
`1
`
`Four Times Amended A method of operating a construction machine the
`
`construction machine including a machine frame carried by a chassis a working drum
`and a drive train the drive train including at least a drive engine component a traction
`for driving the working drum a clutch component and a hydraulic
`
`drive component
`
`pump drive component and a traction drive for driving the working drum including a
`
`drive pulley a driven pulley attached to the working drum and a drive belt connecting
`
`the pulleys the method comprising
`a driving a subset of the components of the drive train from the drive engine
`component with an articulated coupling connected between the drive engine
`
`component and the subset of the components
`
`the subset
`
`including at least the
`
`drive pulley of the traction drive component for driving the working drum
`
`the dutch component and the hydraulic pump drive component with the
`
`clutch component beiktglocated between the hydraulicaump drive component
`
`and the drive pulley
`
`b supporting the drive engine component
`
`from the machine frame elastically
`
`with a first spring stiffness and
`c supporting the subset of the components from the machine frame in a rigid
`manner or with a second spring stiffness the second spring stiffness being
`
`relatively higher than the first spring stiffness
`
`WA
`
`0014045
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-88 Filed 10/25/23 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 28920
`Application No 15934603
`Continuation Sheet PTOL413B
`
`Continuation of Substance of Interview including description of the general nature of what was agreed
`to if an agreement was reached or any other comments
`
`The examiner explained that the amendments filed with the request for continued examination RCE
`to overcome all of a the rejections under 35 USC 112 and b the objections to
`on 13 July 2020 fail
`the specification The examiner suggested amendments to the specification and the claims in order to
`place the application in condition for allowance See the Attachment
`to Interview Summary which
`shows the amendments suggested by the examiner together with an explanation of the reasons for
`these suggested amendments
`
`Applicants representative approved the suggested amendments for entry via Examiners Amendment
`The applicants amendments to the specification filed on 13 July 2020 will not be entered since
`alternative amendments to the specification are included in the Examiners Amendment
`
`WA
`
`0014057
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-88 Filed 10/25/23 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 28921
`
`EXPLANATION
`
`The applicants response filed on July 13 2020including the claim amendments and the
`
`evidence submitted in the form of two Rule 132 declarations overcomes a number of the
`
`rejections set forth in the final Office action mailed on January 29 2020 However from the
`
`examiners viewpoint
`
`the applicants response fails to overcome the following matters
`
`I The issue of new matter recited in the new paragraph added to the specification after line
`2 of column 5 ie the parallel and coaxial
`in the claims and now added to the specification In order to resolve this issue the
`
`relationships of axes previously recited
`
`suggested amendments add two paragraphs to the specification that more closely follow
`
`the original disclosure of the invention including the disclosure found at column 2 lines
`2844 and at column 4 line 52 to column 5 line 2
`2 The issue of new matter recited in independent claims 1 12 14 and 15 ie the
`parallel and coaxial relationships of axes previously recited in these claims In order
`
`to resolve this issue the suggested amendments amend independent claims 1 12 14 and
`
`35 in order to more closely follow the original disclosure of the invention including the
`disclosure found at column 2 lines 2844 and at column 4 line 52 to column 5 line 2
`3 The contradictory definitions in independent claims 1 and 12 of the traction drive
`component as a being a part of the subset of components supported with a second
`spring stiffness and b including the driven pulley which is not disclosed as being
`
`supported with a second spring stiffness In order to resolve this issue the suggested
`amendments amend independent claims 1 and 12 to define a a traction drive including
`a drive pulley a driven pulley and a drive belt connecting the pulleys and b the drive
`
`pulley as being part of the subset of components supported with a second spring
`
`stiffness Corresponding changes are made to claims 8 32 and 33
`4 The contradictory definitions of the subset of components as being supported with a
`spring stiffness in independent claim 1 but as being supported rigidly in dependent
`
`claim 3 In order to resolve this issue the suggested amendments amend independent
`
`claim 1 to define the support as being either in a rigid manner or with a spring stiffness
`A similar alternative limitation is already found in independent claims 14 and 35
`
`WA
`
`0014081
`
`