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 .
The amendment filled 02/24/2026 has been entered. Claims 15-18 have been cancelled. Claims 2, 13, 19, 21 and 24 have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-14 and 19-24 remain pending in the application.
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 1-12, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hao, US (2020/0317256) in view of Puszkiewicz, US (2004/0045768).
In regards to claim 1 Hao discloses:
An aerial lift assembly (10) comprising:
a chassis (12);
a linkage assembly (16) with a plurality of pivotally connected links (23), the linkage assembly connected to the chassis to extend and retract from the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2), wherein the plurality of pivotally connected links comprises a first link (see annotated drawings below), a second link (see annotated drawings below), and a first pivotal connection (see annotated drawings below) interconnecting the first link and the second link so that the second link is pivotal relative to the first link (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2);
a platform (18) supported upon the linkage assembly to extend and retract from the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
598
610
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 1 Hao does not disclose a load sensor.
Puszkiewicz teaches a load sensor (22 or 24; figs. 2 or 3).
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 load sensor taught by Puszkiewicz onto the first pivotal connection of Hao for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success and as motivated by Puszkiewicz i.e., where no redesign or additional structures are necessary to install the load sensing system and provide a safe operation of the scissors lift machine (Abstract; Puszkiewicz). Hence, the modification above subsequently teaches the load sensor provided upon (at least in accordance with the definition of “upon” as obtained from Upon - definition of upon by The Free Dictionary, provided below) the first pivotal connection (pivotal connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz) of the first link and the second link of the plurality of links of the linkage assembly.
PNG
media_image2.png
126
590
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
152
570
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2 Hao as modified by Puszkiewicz teaches the load sensor is further defined as only one load sensor of the aerial lift assembly (the one sensor taught from Puszkiewicz; on one hand as a first interpretation: (a) the claim does not require that the entire assembly has only one sensor, where it can be interpreted as “only one load sensor of the aerial lift assembly” for said pivotal connection, and on the other hand, as an alternate interpretation, only one sensor is being taught from reference Puszkiewicz onto the assembly of reference Hao, hence ending up with only one sensor for the entire aerial lift assembly, although the claim does not recite/require it to be “for the entire aerial lift assembly”). Note that if it is applicant’s intention to recite that the load sensor is the only one load sensor of the entire aerial lift assembly, it would constitute new matter since paragraph [0005] of the specification only supports it to be “defined as only one load sensor”, which can be interpreted to refer to only one pivotal connection not the entire assembly.
In regards to claim 3 Hao discloses the second link further comprises an actuator (24) connected to the first pivotal connection of the linkage assembly to extend and retract the linkage assembly (fig. 1B).
In regards to claim 4 Hao as modified by Puszkiewicz teaches the load sensor is provided on the first pivotal connection (pivotal connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz).
In regards to claim 5 Hao discloses the first pivotal connection further comprises a pin (as shown in annotated drawings above).
In regards to claim 6 Puszkiewicz teaches the load sensor is provided to detect an applicable load and load vector (22 described as a “load sensing pin”; hence detecting load and since load is directed downward due to gravity, and vector is a magnitude measured in a specific direction, it is provided that load sensing pin 22 detects load vector; also described in paragraph [0025]; provided below).
PNG
media_image4.png
258
568
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 7 Puszkiewicz teaches a controller (electronic interface module 30) in communication with the load sensor to receive an applicable load measurement and a load vector for each of a plurality of positions (as described in paragraph [0030]; “The electronic interface module 30 communicates with the lift mechanism and controls operation of the lift mechanism according to the signals from the load sensing pins 22, 24” and paragraph [0034]; “The interface module 30 additionally provides for dynamic load monitoring”; excerpt of paragraphs highlighted below).
PNG
media_image5.png
260
574
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
156
574
media_image6.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 8 Puszkiewicz teaches the controller is programmed to calculate a platform height in response to receipt of the applicable load measurements and the load vectors for the plurality of positions (as described in claim 11 below “the interface module determines a center of gravity of the vertical load on the platform based on the signals from the load sensing pins and platform height or elevation information acquired by direct or non-direct measurement”).
PNG
media_image7.png
130
572
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 9 Puszkiewicz teaches the controller is programmed to calculate a platform load in response to receipt of the applicable load measurements and the load vectors for the plurality of positions (as described in claim 11 above).
In regards to claim 10 Hao discloses the plurality of pivotally connected links is further defined as a plurality of pivotally connected stack links that are retractable to collapse and stack upon the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2).
In regards to claim 11 Hao discloses the second link further comprises an actuator (24) connected to the first pivotal connection of the linkage assembly to extend and retract the linkage assembly (fig. 1B).
In regards to claim 12 Hao as modified by Puszkiewicz teaches the load sensor is provided on the first pivotal connection (pivotal connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz).
In regards to claim 21 Puszkiewicz teaches the pin comprises: a body (body of 22; fig. 2) with a diameter sized to be received within an aperture (see opening in linkage in annotated drawings below) in the linkage assembly (as shown in fig. 2); and a head adjacent to a proximal end of the body (note that the head pointed to in the annotated drawings below is located closer to one end than the other, and that the claim does not require said end to be a terminal end), the head having a diameter greater than a diameter of the aperture in the linkage assembly to provide a limit to translation of installation of the pin in the linkage assembly (see annotated drawings below).
PNG
media_image8.png
366
710
media_image8.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 22 Hao as modified by Puszkiewicz teaches the first link further comprises an intermediate link (one of the middle linkages of the stack shown in fig. 1B; Hao) pivotally connected to a pair of the plurality of pivotally connected stack links (fig. 1B; standard scissors lift function); wherein the actuator is pivotally connected to the linkage assembly at the intermediate link (actuator 24 indirect connection); and wherein the load sensor is provided on the first pivotal connection of the actuator and the intermediate link (pivotal connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz).
Claims 13-14, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hao, US (2020/0317256) in view of Puszkiewicz, US (2004/0045768).
In regards to claim 13 Hao discloses:
An aerial lift assembly (10) comprising:
a chassis (12);
a linkage assembly (16) is connected to the chassis to extend and retract from the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2);
a platform (18) supported upon the linkage assembly to extend and retract from the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2);
an actuator (24) pivotally connected to the linkage assembly at a first pivotal connection {see annotated drawings below; and note that actuator 24 is pivotally connected (indirectly) “at” the first pivotal connection as shown in drawings below and per the definition of “at” as obtained from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/at } to extend and retract the linkage assembly (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2).
PNG
media_image9.png
252
456
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
598
610
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 13 Hao does not disclose a load sensor.
Puszkiewicz teaches a load sensor (22 or 24; figs. 2 or 3).
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 load sensor taught by Puszkiewicz onto the first pivotal connection of Hao for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success and as motivated by Puszkiewicz i.e., where no redesign or additional structures are necessary to install the load sensing system and provide a safe operation of the scissors lift machine (Abstract; Puszkiewicz). Hence, the modification above subsequently teaches the load sensor provided upon (at least in accordance with the definition of “upon” as obtained from Upon - definition of upon by The Free Dictionary, provided below) the first pivotal connection (pivotal connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz) of the actuator and the linkage assembly.
PNG
media_image2.png
126
590
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
152
570
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 14 Hao discloses a pin as the pivotal connection of the actuator and the linkage assembly (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2).
In regards to claim 23 Hao as modified by Puszkiewicz teaches the first link further comprises an intermediate link (one of the middle linkages of the stack shown in fig. 1B; Hao) pivotally connected to a pair of the plurality of pivotally connected stack links (fig. 1B; standard scissors lift function); wherein the actuator is pivotally connected to the linkage assembly at the intermediate link (actuator 24 indirect connection); and wherein the load sensor is provided on the first pivotal connection of the actuator and the intermediate link (pivotal connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz).
In regards to claim 24 Puszkiewicz teaches the pin comprises: a body (body of 22; fig. 2) with a diameter sized to be received within an aperture (see opening in linkage in annotated drawings below) in the linkage assembly (as shown in fig. 2); and a head adjacent to a proximal end of the body (note that the head pointed to in the annotated drawings below is located closer to one end than the other, and that the claim does not require said end to be a terminal end), the head having a diameter greater than a diameter of the aperture in the linkage assembly to provide a limit to translation of installation of the pin in the linkage assembly (see annotated drawings below).
PNG
media_image8.png
366
710
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hao, US (2020/0317256) in view of Puszkiewicz, US (2004/0045768).
In regards to claim 19 Hao discloses:
An aerial lift assembly (10) comprising:
a chassis (12);
a linkage assembly (16) with a plurality of pivotally connected links (23), the linkage assembly connected to the chassis to extend and retract from the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2);
a platform (18) supported upon the linkage assembly to extend and retract from the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2);
an actuator (24) pivotally connected to the linkage assembly at a pivotal connection (see annotated drawings below) to extend and retract the linkage assembly (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2);
a pin (see annotated drawings below) as the pivotal connection of the actuator and the linkage assembly (either of the pins shown in annotated drawings below, direct or indirect connection).
PNG
media_image10.png
598
610
media_image10.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 19 Hao does not disclose a load sensor.
Puszkiewicz teaches a load sensor (24; fig. 3).
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 load sensor taught by Puszkiewicz onto the first pivotal connection of Hao for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success and as motivated by Puszkiewicz i.e., where no redesign or additional structures are necessary to install the load sensing system and provide a safe operation of the scissors lift machine (Abstract; Puszkiewicz).
the modification Hao with Puszkiewicz above subsequently teaches the load sensor provided on the pin of the actuator (pin connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz) and one of the plurality of links of the linkage assembly to detect an applicable load and load vector; and
a controller (electronic interface module 30; Puszkiewicz) in communication with the load sensor to receive an applicable load measurement and a load vector for each of a plurality of positions (as described in paragraph [0030]; Puszkiewicz; “The electronic interface module 30 communicates with the lift mechanism and controls operation of the lift mechanism according to the signals from the load sensing pins 22, 24” and paragraph [0034]; Puszkiewicz “The interface module 30 additionally provides for dynamic load monitoring”; excerpt of paragraphs highlighted below; Puszkiewicz), wherein the controller is programmed to:
calculate a platform height in response to receipt of the applicable load measurements and the load vectors for the plurality of positions (as described in claim 11 below “the interface module determines a center of gravity of the vertical load on the platform based on the signals from the load sensing pins and platform height or elevation information acquired by direct or non-direct measurement”; Puszkiewicz), and
calculate a platform load in response to receipt of the applicable load measurements and the load vectors for the plurality of positions (as described in claim 11 Puszkiewicz below “the interface module determines a center of gravity of the vertical load on the platform based on the signals from the load sensing pins and platform height or elevation information acquired by direct or non-direct measurement”; Puszkiewicz).
PNG
media_image11.png
605
489
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
130
572
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
389
727
media_image12.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
258
568
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
260
574
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
156
574
media_image6.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 20 Hao discloses the plurality of pivotally connected links is further defined as a plurality of pivotally connected stack links that are retractable to collapse and stack upon the chassis (as shown in figs. 1A, 1B, 2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because:
Applicant argues “The rejection relies on Puszkiewicz for teaching "a load sensor (22 or 24; figs. 2 or 3)." Puszkiewicz teaches load sensors that are provided on a pivotal connection of the links with the platform 20, (Puszkiewicz et al., at paragraphs [0023], [0024]) and not "upon the first pivotal connection of the first link and the second link" as claimed. Therefore, the combination of Hao and Puszkiewicz fails to satisfy all of the claim limitations ... the links 23 of Hao are not constrained rotationally, in contrast to the platform 20 of Puszkiewicz. The sensors of Puszkiewicz are applicable only at a pivotal connection with the platform (or with the frame) which maintains a rotational position. See paragraphs [0006] and [0025]. The proposed modification is contrary to the teachings of Puszkiewicz and would render the sensors of Puszkiewicz unfit for their intended purpose. Therefore, the proposed combination is nonobvious. The only reason to make the proposed combination with the proposed modification employs impermissible hindsight and is derived from Applicant's specification”; examiner respectfully disagrees and presents that:
(A) the rejection of Hao as modified by Puszkiewicz indeed teaches the load sensor provided upon (at least in accordance with the definition of “upon” as obtained from Upon - definition of upon by The Free Dictionary, provided below) the first pivotal connection (pivotal connection of Hao as shown in annotated drawings above and in the manner taught by Puszkiewicz and shown in fig. 3 of Puszkiewicz) of the first link and the second link of the plurality of links of the linkage assembly. Note the first definition provided below in light of applicant’s arguments that Puszkiewicz teaches load sensors that are provided on a pivotal connection of the links ... and not "upon the first pivotal connection.
PNG
media_image2.png
126
590
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
152
570
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(B) Examiner disagrees with applicant’s characterization of that: “The sensors of Puszkiewicz are applicable only at a pivotal connection with the platform (or with the frame) which maintains a rotational position. See paragraphs [0006] and [0025]. The proposed modification is contrary to the teachings of Puszkiewicz and would render the sensors of Puszkiewicz unfit for their intended purpose”, and presents that there is nothing in either the primary reference Hao or teaching reference Puszkiewicz that would preclude or destroy the sensor from operating in the same manner once taught onto the pivotal connection of Hao.
(C) In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Applicant argues “claim 2 recites "wherein the load sensor is further defined as only one load sensor of the aerial lift assembly." Puszkiewicz discloses utilization of four sensors, or two sensors as an alternative, at paragraph [0010]. However, Puszkiewicz fails to teach only one load sensor, as claimed. Puszkiewicz also fails to suggest any reason to provide only one load sensor”; examiner respectfully disagrees and presents that the one sensor taught from Puszkiewicz; on one hand as a first interpretation: (a) the claim does not require that the entire assembly has only one sensor, where it can be interpreted as “only one load sensor of the aerial lift assembly” for said pivotal connection, and on the other hand, as an alternate interpretation, only one sensor is being taught from reference Puszkiewicz onto the assembly of reference Hao, hence ending up with only one sensor for the entire aerial lift assembly, although the claim does not recite/require it to be “for the entire aerial lift assembly”. Note that if it is applicant’s intention to recite that the load sensor is the only one load sensor of the entire aerial lift assembly, it would constitute new matter since paragraph [0005] of the specification only supports it to be “defined as only one load sensor”, which can be interpreted to refer to only one pivotal connection not the entire assembly.
Applicant argues “Claim 8 recites "wherein the controller is programmed to calculate a platform height". The combination of references fails to satisfy this claim limitation. The rejection relies on claim 11 of Hao which recites "a center of gravity", which is not the "platform height" as claimed”, and similarly argues with regards to claim 9 that: “Claim 9 recites "wherein the controller is programmed to calculate a platform load". The combination of references fails to satisfy this claim limitation. The rejection relies on claim 11 of Hao which recites "a center of gravity", which is not the "platform load" as claimed”; examiner respectfully disagrees and presents that Puszkiewicz teaches the above argues limitations where as described in claim 11 below “the interface module determines a center of gravity of the vertical load on the platform based on the signals from the load sensing pins i.e., load which includes the platform load (as it pertains to claim 9) and platform height (as it pertains to claim 8) or elevation information acquired by direct or non-direct measurement”. It appears that applicant during his argument oversaw the rest of the recitation detailed in claim 11 (Puszkiewicz) reproduced below.
PNG
media_image13.png
136
538
media_image13.png
Greyscale
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 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
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights