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 .
Response to Amendment/Arguments
This office action is in response to applicant’s reply filed 9/16/25. Amended Claims 1 and 12 are pending.
Regarding the previous 112(f) interpretations, the amendments to the claims removes the presence of “means”.
Regarding the previous 112(b) rejections, the claim amendments and cancellations largely resolve these issues. However examiner notes currently amended claim 12 continues to contain contradictory claim language.
Regarding the previous 112(d) rejections, these are no longer applicable after the claim amendments.
Regarding the previously applied prior art rejections under 103, examiner agrees the previously applied Hunger in view of JP006 combination has been overcome by the claim amendments. Please see the following action for treatment of the amended claims.
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, the Claim 1 language (supported in original disclosure at specification p. 13, lines 26-32 and original Claim 5 but not currently depicted; compare with Figs. 7 and 8 and in text of specification surrounding above cited location supporting Claim 12, as best understood) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 12 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 12 recites in part “a pair of conduits arranged to provide a communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve via a second valve” and “wherein the second valve is bypassed by the piston side conduit”. This is indefinite. The claim is contradictory whether fluid flows through both conduits through the second valve (“via”) or if fluid does not flow through both conduits through the second valve (“bypassed”). The metes and bounds of the claimed invention are indefinite. For the purposes of examination, “via a second valve” is omitted from consideration given the similar language present in the previously submitted claims was amended out.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunger et al. (US 3705656, previously cited) in view of Bleekman et al. (EP 2476641), as evidenced by Nordqvist (SE 505996, previously cited).
Regarding Claim 1, Hunger teaches
A working machine with an implement (ex. 94), a tilting hydraulic cylinder (“tilt control cylinders”) arranged to actuate a tilting movement of the implement, and an implement attachment device (Figs. 1-3) for selectively attaching the implement to the working machine, wherein the implement attachment device comprises:
a hydraulic cylinder (40 or 42) comprising a cylinder housing with first and second longitudinal ends, a piston (60 or 62 or 72 or 74) in the cylinder housing, and a piston rod (64 or 66 or 76 or 78) fixed to the piston and protruding through the first longitudinal end of the cylinder housing, wherein a protruding portion of the piston rod is adapted to engage with a complementary element of the implement (Figs. 1-3); and
a hydraulic conduit and valve arrangement connected to the hydraulic cylinder, and comprising a control valve (87), a pair of conduits (88/83 and 89/86/84/85) arranged to provide a communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve,
wherein the pair of conduits comprise a piston side conduit (88/83) extending from the control valve toward the piston side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder, and a rod side conduit (89/86/85/84) extending from the control valve toward the rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder.
Hunger does not teach
arranged to selectively allow a communication between a piston side chamber and a rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder
wherein a second valve allows, in a first position, the communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve by the pair of conduits, and to allow, in a second position, the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder by the pair of conduits;
wherein the second valve is arranged to allow, in the first position, the communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve through the piston side conduit and the rod side conduit, and to allow, in the second position, the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber via at least a portion of the piston side conduit and at least a portion of the rod side conduit;
wherein the second valve is bypassed by the rod side conduit, and allows, in the first position, a communication between the control valve and the hydraulic cylinder through the piston side conduit and the rod side conduit, and allows, in the second position, a communication between the rod side conduit and a first portion of the piston side conduit, that extends between the second valve and the hydraulic cylinder, while blocking the communication through a second portion of the piston side conduit between the second valve and the control valve.
Bleekman teaches
For a hydraulic system,
a second valve (36, Fig. 3) arranged to selectively allow a communication between a piston side chamber (51) and a rod side chamber (52) of the hydraulic cylinder (54)
wherein a second valve (36) allows, in a first position (illustrated, unactuated position), the communication between the hydraulic cylinder (54) and the control valve (33) by the pair of conduits, and to allow, in a second (actuated position), the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder by the pair of conduits;
wherein the second valve is arranged to allow, in the first position (illustrated, unactuated position), the communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve through the piston side conduit and the rod side conduit, and to allow, in the second (actuated position), the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber via at least a portion of the piston side conduit and at least a portion of the rod side conduit;
wherein the second valve is bypassed by the rod side conduit (note 41), and allows, in the first position (illustrated, unactuated position), a communication between the control valve and the hydraulic cylinder through the piston side conduit and the rod side conduit, and allows, in the second (actuated position), a communication between the rod side conduit and a first portion of the piston side conduit, that extends between the second valve and the hydraulic cylinder, while blocking the communication through a second portion of the piston side conduit between the second valve and the control valve.
Since both references are directed to hydraulic systems, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hydraulic system of Hunger to include a “second valve” and associated parts as taught by Bleekman in order to provide valve that is able to actuate the pistons outwards into the locked position engaged with a complementary element of the implement, as evidenced by Nordqvist (p. 7 of translation mailed 9/26/22 - “whereby the area difference makes that the piston 47, (47’) is pressure outwards towards implement locking positions with a force that is essentially independent of the hydraulic pressure”).
Claim 12, as far as it is definite and understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunger in view of Skiba et al. (US 6267041).
Regarding Claim 12, Hunger teaches
A working machine with an implement (ex. 94), a tilting hydraulic cylinder (“tilt control cylinders”) arranged to actuate a tilting movement of the implement, and an implement attachment device (Figs. 1-3) for selectively attaching the implement to the working machine, wherein the implement attachment device comprises:
a hydraulic cylinder (40 or 42) comprising a cylinder housing with first and second longitudinal ends, a piston (60 or 62 or 72 or 74) in the cylinder housing, and a piston rod (64 or 66 or 76 or 78) fixed to the piston and protruding through the first longitudinal end of the cylinder housing, wherein a protruding portion of the piston rod is adapted to engage with a complementary element of the implement (Figs. 1-3); and
a hydraulic conduit and valve arrangement connected to the hydraulic cylinder, and comprising a control valve (87), a pair of conduits (88/83 and 89/86/84/85) arranged to provide a communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve
wherein the pair of conduits comprise a piston side conduit (88/83) extending from the control valve toward the piston side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder, and a rod side conduit (89/86/85/84) extending from the control valve toward the rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder.
Hunger does not teach
arranged to selectively allow a communication between a piston side chamber and a rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder
wherein the second valve allows, in a first position, the communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve by the pair of conduits, and to allow, in a second position, the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder by the pair of conduits;
wherein the second valve is arranged to allow, in the first position, the communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve through the piston side conduit and the rod side conduit, and to allow, in the second position, the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber via at least a portion of the piston side conduit and at least a portion of the rod side conduit
wherein the second valve is bypassed by the piston side conduit, and allows, in the first position, a communication between the control valve and the hydraulic cylinder through the rod side conduit and the piston side conduit, and allows, in the second position, a communication between the piston side conduit and a first portion of the rod side conduit that extends between the second valve and the hydraulic cylinder, while blocking the communication through a second portion of the rod side conduit between the second valve and the control valve.
Skiba teaches
For a hydraulic system,
a second valve (38, Fig. 1) arranged to selectively allow a communication between a piston side chamber (14) and a rod side chamber (16) of the hydraulic cylinder (12)
wherein the second valve allows, in a first position (38’), the communication between the hydraulic cylinder (12) and the control valve (30) by the pair of conduits, and to allow, in a second position (38’’), the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber of the hydraulic cylinder by the pair of conduits;
wherein the second valve is arranged to allow, in the first position (38’), the communication between the hydraulic cylinder and the control valve through the piston side conduit and the rod side conduit, and to allow, in the second position (38’’), the communication between the piston side chamber and the rod side chamber via at least a portion of the piston side conduit and at least a portion of the rod side conduit
wherein the second valve is bypassed by the piston side conduit (Fig. 1, note 44), and allows, in the first position (38’), a communication between the control valve and the hydraulic cylinder through the rod side conduit and the piston side conduit, and allows, in the second position (38’’), a communication between the piston side conduit and a first portion of the rod side conduit that extends between the second valve and the hydraulic cylinder, while blocking the communication through a second portion of the rod side conduit between the second valve and the control valve.
“The present fluid regeneration circuit is therefore specifically responsive to the rapid movement of the implement actuating cylinder based upon the cylinder piston velocity parameter and such regeneration circuit can be utilized in a wide variety of different types of work machines as well as a wide variety of different hydraulic circuit applications The present regeneration circuit provides a more responsive regeneration capability and increases the overall efficiency of filling the expanding side of a actuating hydraulic cylinder.” (Col. 2, lines 58-67)
Since both references are directed to hydraulic systems, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hydraulic system of Hunger to include a “second valve” and associated parts as taught by Skiba in order to provide a more responsive regeneration capability and increases the overall efficiency of filling the expanding side of a actuating hydraulic cylinder.
Conclusion
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 MICHAEL QUANDT whose telephone number is (571)272-1247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 10am-4pm.
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, NATHANIEL WIEHE can be reached at (571)272-8648. 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.
MICHAEL QUANDT
Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/MICHAEL QUANDT/Examiner, Art Unit 3745