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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/23/2025 has been entered.
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 “mounting structure” claim 1 and the arrangement of having two control devices in addition to an auxiliary wireless control device as claimed in claim 21, 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 Objections
Claims 1 and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “an occupant” in line 11 and again in line 14, are they the same? The same issue applies in claim 21 establishing in three different instances “an occupant”.
Claim 21 line 8 recites “the auxiliary wireless control device is configured to be removably coupled to the work platform at a location different from the first control device and the second control device coupled to one of the forward end and the aft end of the work platform”; what is the element referred to as “coupled to one of the forward end and the aft end of the work platform”?
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 and 21-26 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The recitations: “the auxiliary wireless control device is configured to be wirelessly connected to the control system and mechanically coupled to the mounting structure of the work platform at a location different from a location of the first control device” in claim 1, and the positively recitation of all three control devices i.e., first and second control devices in addition to an auxiliary wireless control device in claim 21, and further the recitation “in response to the auxiliary wireless control device being secured within the mounting structure, the auxiliary wireless control device is electrically connected and wired” in claim 23 and in light of the lack of illustration of a mounting structure where an auxiliary wireless control device can be mounted, it is submitted that according to the disclosure, what is shown in fig. 3 are only the first and second control devices, and where the auxiliary wireless control device is only shown separate in fig. 8; therefore, the lack of illustration of a mounting structure that would receive the auxiliary wireless control device at a location different than that of the first and second control devices and also the structure and design of such mounting structure that allows for wired communication once the auxiliary wireless control device is secured within it. Note that while stated in the specification, no further details are given as to how such mounting structure would operate, or the manner to switch between wireless to wired communication once the auxiliary device is secured within the mounting structure. In conclusion, the claims are not clear as to the presence of all three control devices and the manner of operation of the auxiliary device with respect to the unillustrated mounting structure.
Dependent claims are rejected at least for depending from a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 1-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker, US (2017/0211765) in view of Bond, US (2009/0145871).
In regards to claim 1 Walker discloses:
An aerial work vehicle (AWV) (10; fig. 1) comprising:
a boom (14);
a work platform (16) coupled to a distal end (top end) of the boom (as shown in fig. 1), the work platform having;
a forward end (facing page) in a direction of travel (forward from where cab 38 is located),
an aft end (facing viewer) opposite the forward end, and
a mounting structure (outer and inner walls 68, 104; fig. 4);
a control system (hydraulic valves, batteries, and other components; paragraph [0037]; also including hydraulic lines running to control valves that controls motion of the boom) in communication with and configured to aid in controlling operation of at least the boom (valves, batteries, and other components described as “boom controls” in paragraph [0037]);
a first control device (left hand side controls 24 as shown in fig. 2 & 4 also shown at far end in fig. 3) communicatively coupled to the control system (24 described as upper boom controls), the first control device mechanically coupled to one of the forward end and the aft end of the work platform (as shown in figs. 2, 4 being perpendicular to controls 24 facing viewer and on the left hand side of fig. 3; hence facing page in fig. 1 i.e., in the forward facing direction) to control operation of at least the boom by an occupant of the work platform via the control system (occupant standing in utility platform 18).
PNG
media_image1.png
673
598
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 1 Walker does not disclose an auxiliary wireless control device.
Bond teaches an auxiliary wireless control device (22) communicatively coupled to the control system (18; equated to control system of Walker) and configured to control operation of at least the boom (via inputs 66) by an occupant of the work platform via the control system (“wireless control box is mounted on the work platform and includes levers, joysticks, etc., to operate boom functions” as described in paragraph [0005]),
wherein the auxiliary wireless control device is configured to be wirelessly connected to the control system (via transmitter 28 and receiver 20; as shown in fig. 2 and described in paragraph [0016]) and mechanically coupled to the mounting structure (plate bracket carrying control device 22 as shown in annotated fig. 2 below) of the work platform.
PNG
media_image2.png
607
952
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the wireless auxiliary control device 22 taught by Bond onto the work platform 16 of Walker for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success and as motivated by Bond (paragraph [0016]) i.e., “Many times, the control box 22 is not in a convenient location within the platform 14 to enable the operator to conveniently operate the same. For example, if the control box 22 is located at one side of the work platform 14 and the operator must observe or work from the other side of the work platform 14, it is difficult for the operator to reach the control box 22. It is for that reason that the control box is removably mounted within the work platform 14 … the control box 22 is removably mounted on the work platform 14, the control box 22 may be moved to any location within the work platform 14 as desired so that the operator may conveniently operate the same”. As clearly stated above, the convenience of having a wireless control device mountable and removable from any point on the work platform is obvious i.e. flexibility for the operator to control from any location and when facing any direction. Teaching the wireless control device of Bond onto Walker subsequently teaches that the auxiliary wireless control device providing an alternative technique of controlling operation of at least the boom other than the first control device. Moreover, and also as a result of the modification above and the motivation of Bond, the above subsequently teaches the wireless control device is mechanically coupled to the mounting structure of the work platform at a location different from a location of the first control device; to further clarify, while the device of Bond can be placed at any location within the work platform, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find that placing it at the far corner at reference line 26 in Walker fig 4 would allow for more versatility, convenience and flexibility of operation of the platform.
PNG
media_image3.png
573
572
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2 Bond teaches the first control device includes a lockout circuit (on/off switch 24) interconnecting the first control device and the auxiliary wireless control device to prevent motion commands received by one of the first control device or the auxiliary wireless control device from causing the boom to move (to enable the hard wired connection between the control box 22 and radio receiver 20 to be disconnected) when the other of the first control device or the auxiliary wireless control device is active (as described in paragraph [0015]).
In regards to claim 3 Walker as modified by Bond teaches the first control device is permanently coupled to the one of the forward end of the work platform or the aft end of the work platform (as shown in figs. 2, 3, 4; Walker), and wherein the auxiliary wireless control device (22; Bond) is one of i) mechanically separate from the work platform (as described in paragraph [0016]) and ii) removably coupleable to the mounting structure the work platform (as described in paragraph [0016]).
PNG
media_image3.png
573
572
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 4 Bond teaches the auxiliary wireless control device is an auxiliary wireless hand-held device (where the operator can take the controller to any desired location) that includes a rechargeable power supply (battery pack/battery operated claims 2 and 3; Bond).
In regards to claim 5 Bond teaches the rechargeable power supply is configured to be coupled to electrical power provided by the AWV to recharge the rechargeable power supply {it is known that batteries are re-chargeable and hence are configured to be charged by a power supply that can be provided by the AWV (or other alternative supply source; which wouldn’t alter the battery’s configuration to be recharged)}.
In regards to claim 10 Bond teaches the auxiliary wireless control device comprises at least one of: i) a first input device for controlling a level of the boom; ii) a second input device for controlling an extension position of the boom, or iii) a third input device for controlling a motion of a jib coupled to and extending relative to the boom (“to control the boom and crane functions from the ground by way of the wireless connection” as described in paragraph [0008]).
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker and Bond as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jeffries, US (2018/0050893).
In regards to claim 6 Bond teaches the auxiliary wireless control device comprises: an input device configured to receive one or more motion commands from an operator of the AWV (control handles shown in fig. 2).
In regards to claim 6 Walker and Bond do not explicitly teach the auxiliary wireless control device comprises a wireless transceiver; a processor; and a memory device storing computer-executable instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to at least: receive at least one motion command from the input device; and in response to receiving the at least one motion command, control the wireless transceiver to transmit a control signal to a control system of the AWV, wherein the control system of the AWV executes the at least one motion command based upon the control signal.
Jeffries teaches the auxiliary wireless control device comprises a wireless transceiver (as described in paragraph [0020] & [0022]); a processor (microprocessor 42); and a memory device storing computer-executable instructions (it is provided that for the controller to be able to translate/transmit a specific signal, a memory at least a short term temporary, is inherently present to identify/differentiate different signals), which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to at least: receive at least one motion command from the input device; and in response to receiving the at least one motion command (from any of 52, 54, 56 and 58), control the wireless transceiver to transmit a control signal to a control system of the AWV (as described in paragraph [0020] & [0022]), wherein the control system of the AWV executes the at least one motion command based upon the control signal (as non limiting examples manipulate the upper and lower arms and rotate the bucket assembly; paragraph [0022]).
PNG
media_image4.png
169
596
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
319
572
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
290
580
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the communication protocol taught by Jeffries onto the device of Walker as modified by Bond for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success i.e., to allow for storage of the motions and commands executed and to allow for the auxiliary wireless device of Bond to receiver as well as send signals, where a ground user can further control the wireless device held by the occupant of the work platform in order to enable/disable, take over controls in case of an emergency for instance.
In regards to claim 7 although Jeffries does not specify the nature of the wireless transceiver; examiner takes Official Notice that radio frequency (RF) transceivers, Bluetooth transceiver, and WiFi transceivers are all old and well-known in the art. A person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it useful, convenient and/or economical to utilize one of the transceiver types above to transmit the signal from the remote device 36 as described by Jeffries.
In regards to claim 8 Jeffries teaches wherein the second control device is an auxiliary wireless hand-held device (as described in paragraph [0020]; excerpt above and fig. 1) that includes a rechargeable power supply battery 46, the AWV further comprising a control system (controller 36) comprising: a wireless transceiver (as described in paragraph [0020] & [0022]); a processor (microprocessor 42); and memory device storing computer-executable instructions (it is provided that for the controller to be able to translate/transmit a specific signal, a memory at least a short term temporary, is inherently present to identify/differentiate different signals), which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to at least: control the wireless transceiver to receive a control signal from the hand-held control device (from any of 52, 54, 56 and 58), the control signal including at least one motion command; and execute the at least one motion command to control an operation of the AWV (as described in paragraph [0020] & [0022]; see above), wherein the control system of the AWV executes the at least one motion command based upon the control signal (as none limiting examples manipulate the upper and lower arms and rotate the bucket assembly; paragraph [0022]; see above).
In regards to claim 9 although Jeffries does not specify the nature of the wireless transceiver; examiner takes Official Notice that radio frequency (RF) transceivers, Bluetooth transceiver, and WiFi transceivers are all old and well-known in the art. A person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it useful, convenient and/or economical to utilize one of the transceiver types above to transmit the signal from the remote device 36 as described by Jeffries.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker, US (2017/0211765) in view of Bond, US (2009/0145871).
In regards to claim 21 Walker discloses:
An aerial work vehicle (AWV) (10; fig. 1) comprising:
a boom (14);
a work platform (16) coupled to a distal end (top end) of the boom (as shown in fig. 1), the work platform having:
a forward end (facing page) in a direction of travel (forward from where cab 38 is located), and
an aft end (facing viewer) opposite the forward end;
a first control device (left hand side controls 24 as shown in fig. 2 & 4 also shown at far end in fig. 3) coupled to one of the forward end and the aft end of the work platform (as shown in figs. 2, 4 being perpendicular to controls 24 facing viewer and on the left hand side of fig. 3; hence facing page in fig. 1 i.e., in the forward facing direction) to control operation of at least the boom by an occupant of the work platform (occupant standing in utility platform 18);
a second control device (right hand side controls 24 as shown in fig. 2 & 4 also shown at left hand side in fig. 3) to control operation of at least the boom (via inputs 66) by an occupant of the work platform (occupant standing in utility platform 18).
PNG
media_image7.png
673
605
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 21 Walker does not disclose an auxiliary wireless control device.
Bond teaches an auxiliary wireless control device (22) configured to control operation of at least the boom by an occupant of the work platform (“wireless control box is mounted on the work platform and includes levers, joysticks, etc., to operate boom functions” as described in paragraph [0005]),
wherein the auxiliary wireless control device is configured to be removably coupled to the work platform (at plate bracket holding 22; as shown in annotated drawings below) at a location different from the first control device and the second control device coupled to one of the forward end and the aft end of the work platform (“control box 22 may be moved to any location within the work platform 14 as desired” as described in paragraph [0016]).
PNG
media_image8.png
607
921
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the wireless auxiliary control device 22 taught by Bond onto the work platform 16 of Walker for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success and as motivated by Bond (paragraph [0016]) i.e., “Many times, the control box 22 is not in a convenient location within the platform 14 to enable the operator to conveniently operate the same. For example, if the control box 22 is located at one side of the work platform 14 and the operator must observe or work from the other side of the work platform 14, it is difficult for the operator to reach the control box 22. It is for that reason that the control box is removably mounted within the work platform 14 … the control box 22 is removably mounted on the work platform 14, the control box 22 may be moved to any location within the work platform 14 as desired so that the operator may conveniently operate the same”. As clearly stated above, the convenience of having a wireless control device mountable and removable from any point on the work platform is obvious i.e. flexibility for the operator to control from any location and when facing any direction. Teaching the wireless control device of Bond onto Walker subsequently teaches that the auxiliary wireless control device providing an alternative technique of controlling operation of at least the boom other than the first control device and the second control device; to further clarify, while the device of Bond can be placed at any location within the work platform, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find that placing it at the far corner at reference line 26 would allow for more versatility, convenience and flexibility of operation of the platform.
In regards to claim 21 Walker does not disclose the second control device is coupled to the other of the forward end and the aft end of the work platform. However, it would have been obvious to couple the second control device to the other of the forward end and the aft end since the rearrangement of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art and coupling the second control device to the other of the forward end and the aft end would not alter the performance of the device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). A person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to rearrange the second control device to be coupled to the other of the forward end and the aft end, for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success i.e., to allow the worker to operate the boom when facing opposite sides of the work platform so as to solve this known problem also as described in Bond paragraph [0016] i.e., if the control box is located at one side of the work platform and the operator must observe or work from the other side of the work platform, it is difficult for the operator to reach the control box.
In regards to claim 22 Walker as modified by Bond teaches the work platform further includes a mounting structure (see annotated drawings below) affixed to the work platform at the location different from the first control device and the second control device coupled to one of the forward end and the aft end of the work platform (once the auxiliary device is taught onto Walker device as detailed above), the mounting structure configured to secure the auxiliary wireless control device to the work platform (while the device of Bond can be placed at any location within the work platform, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find that placing it at the far corner at reference line 26 would allow for more versatility, convenience and flexibility of operation of the platform).
PNG
media_image2.png
607
952
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker and Bond as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Jeffries, US (2018/0050893).
In regards to claim 25 Walker as modified by Bond teaches a control system (hydraulic valves, batteries, and other components; paragraph [0037]; also including hydraulic lines running to control valves that controls motion of the boom; Walker) communicatively coupled to the first control device (left hand side controls 24 as shown in fig. 2 & 4 also shown at far end in fig. 3; Walker), the second control device (right hand side controls 24 as shown in fig. 2 & 4 also shown at left hand side in fig. 3; Walker), and the auxiliary wireless control device (22; Bond).
In regards to claim 25 Walker and Bond do not explicitly teach a processor communicatively coupled to the first control device, the second control device, and the auxiliary wireless control device; a transceiver communicatively coupled to the processor; and a memory device communicatively coupled to the processor, the memory device storing computer-executable instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to at least: control the transceiver to receive a control signal from the auxiliary wireless control device, the control signal including at least one motion command; and execute the at least one motion command to control an operation of the AWV.
Jeffries teaches a processor (microprocessor 42) communicatively coupled to the first control device, the second control device, and the auxiliary wireless control device; a transceiver (as described in paragraph [0020] & [0022]) communicatively coupled to the processor; and a memory device (it is provided that for the controller to be able to translate/transmit a specific signal, a memory at least a short term temporary, is inherently present to identify/differentiate different signals) communicatively coupled to the processor, the memory device storing computer-executable instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to at least: control the transceiver to receive a control signal from the auxiliary wireless control device (from any of 52, 54, 56 and 58), the control signal including at least one motion command (as described in paragraph [0020] & [0022]); and execute the at least one motion command to control an operation of the AWV (as none limiting examples manipulate the upper and lower arms and rotate the bucket assembly; paragraph [0022]).
PNG
media_image4.png
169
596
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
319
572
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
290
580
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the communication protocol taught by Jeffries onto the device of Walker as modified by Bond for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success i.e., to allow for storage of the motions and commands executed and to allow for the auxiliary wireless device of Bond to receiver as well as send signals, where a ground user can further control the wireless device held by the occupant of the work platform in order to enable/disable, take over controls in case of an emergency for instance.
In regards to claim 26 Jeffries teaches the computer-executable instructions stored on the memory device (it is provided that for the controller to be able to translate/transmit a specific signal, a memory at least a short term temporary, is inherently present to identify/differentiate different signals), which when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to at least: receive a distinct control signal from one of the first control device or the second control device (as described in paragraph [0020] & [0022]), the distinct control signal including at least one motion command (from any of 52, 54, 56 and 58); and execute the at least one motion command to control an operation of the AWV (as none limiting examples manipulate the upper and lower arms and rotate the bucket assembly; paragraph [0022]).
PNG
media_image4.png
169
596
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
319
572
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
290
580
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-24 would be allowable if rewritten 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 to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/23/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to PTO-892 form for list of cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIREF M MEKHAEIL whose telephone number is (571)270-5334. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7 Mon-Fri.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/S.M.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634