The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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, 4-9, 13, 14 and 16-20 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.
Claim 1, lines 22-23, the recitation “one of said … pulleys being at least motor-driven” is not understood (emphasis added). There appears to be no basis in the specification for the pulley(s) to be driven by anything other than a motor. It is believed --at least one of said … pulleys being motor-driven-- may have been intended.
Claim 6 depends from canceled claim 2, and the recitation “said at least one uprights” is grammatically incorrect and lacks proper antecedent basis (should apparently be --said at least one longitudinal upright--). It is also unclear if applicant is intending to recite that one fixed upright may carry more than one longitudinal upright or that each of at least one fixed upright carries a corresponding one of at least one longitudinal upright. The latter will be assumed.
Claim 17, line 2, for improved clarity and understanding of the claim, the recitation “comprising steps of gripping, moving” should be --comprising gripping the vehicle, moving the vehicle--.
Claim 18, lines 4-5, for improved clarity and understanding of the claim, the recitation “characterized … for” should be --the method comprising--;
and line 7, the recitation “putting down said … vehicle” is not understood, as the vehicle has not been recited as having been picked up.
Claim 19, lines 2-3, for improved clarity and understanding of the claim, the recitation “with at least two … said devices” should be --said at least one conveying device comprising at least two conveying devices, the method comprising controlling said at least two conveying devices--.
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, 4, 6-9, 13, 14, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (CN 106245966, previously cited) in view of Hansl (US 2007/0140817).
Liu shows a conveying device 1 for moving and parking a vehicle 19, the conveying device being movable and comprising at least one vehicle gripper 15/16 configured to be movable between a gripping position in which said at least one gripper extends at least partially below the vehicle (implicit from Figs. 3 and 5), and a release position in which said at least one gripper does not extend below the vehicle (Figs. 1 and 2), wherein said at least one gripper is configured to support the weight of the vehicle (inherent), at least one computer (note disclosed “upper” and “lower” computers in the provided machine translation) associated with sensors (e.g., “obstacle avoidance sensor”, “reflective laser sensor”, “pressure sensor”), configured to control the movement of the conveying device (i.e., “navigation, route guidance, …”) as well as said at least one gripper (“specifying a tire position and aligning the forks of the tire”), wherein said conveying device comprises at least one column 8, and at least one longitudinal upright 9 connected to said at least one column, said at least one longitudinal upright being equipped with said at least one gripper, said at least one computer being further configured to drive said at least one longitudinal upright, movable between a low position in which said at least one longitudinal upright allows said at least one gripper to be placed below the vehicle (Figs. 1-3), and a high position in which said at least one longitudinal upright is arranged above the height of the vehicle (Fig. 5), said conveying device further comprising a lifting system including: a lifting chain (not separately identified but each of the lifting drives 3 shown in Fig. 1 includes a chain wheel and chain transmission mechanism, as can be seen in Fig. 2) extending inside said at least one column and engaged with an upper pulley 5 inside said at least one column; a mounting support 6 equipped with a roller 7 or a slider guided by a guide structure 8 of said at least one column, said mounting support being fixed to said at least one longitudinal upright; a fixing structure attached to said lifting chain (not separately identified but Fig. 2 shows a structure for fixing the end of the chain to the mounting support), so that said lifting chain directly drives vertical displacement of said at least one longitudinal upright between said high position and said low position.
Liu does not show the lifting chain engaged with both the upper pulley and a lower pulley arranged at different heights inside said at least one column, with (at least) one of said upper and lower pulleys being [at least] motor-driven.
Hansl shows a computer-controlled transport vehicle with a lifting system including (refer to at least Fig. 1): a lifting chain 19 extending along a column 7 and engaged with an upper pulley 17 and a lower pulley 16 arranged at different heights on the column, one of said upper and lower pulleys being driven by motor 18; a mounting support 12 equipped with rollers 11 guided by a guide structure 13 of the column, the mounting support being fixed to at least one longitudinal upright 5; and a fixing structure attached to said lifting chain (not explicitly identified but par. [0046] discloses that the ends of chain 19 are attached to the lifting platform 5), so that the lifting chain directly drives vertical displacement of the at least one longitudinal upright between a high position and a low position.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Liu by substituting upper and lower vertically spaced pulleys for the single pulley thereof, with one of the pulleys being motor-driven, as shown by Hansl, as this would simply be the selection of one of a finite number of known alternate equivalent lifting arrangements from which to choose, as this would perform substantially the same purpose in a substantially similar environment, the selection of which in the apparatus of Liu would have required no undue experimentation and produced no unexpected results, especially since Liu indicates that either electric or hydraulic power may be utilized for the lifting mechanisms.
Re claim 4, the conveying device of Liu comprises a traction system associated with multidirectional wheels 2 controlled by said at least one computer.
Re claim 6, the conveying device of Liu comprises at least one fixed upright 8 carrying one or more of said at least one longitudinal upright[s].
Re claim 7, Lui’s gripper comprises independent articulated arms 16.
Re claim 8, the at least one gripper of Liu can vary its position along said at least one longitudinal upright.
Re claim 9, said at least one gripper of Liu is configured to grip the vehicle by its chassis or by a carrying platform. The wheels/tires are considered part of a vehicle chassis, as broadly recited.
Re claim 13, the conveying device of Liu comprises “at least one robot handling or inspection arm” 16, as broadly recited.
Re claim 14, the conveying device of Liu is a centrally symmetrical structure “for one or more of said at least one gripper, said at least one longitudinal upright, and said at least one column”, as broadly claimed.
Re claims 17, 18, and 20, the examiner notes that the conveying device of Lui is clearly capable of performing a method of moving and parking a vehicle comprising gripping, moving and parking the vehicle by using the conveying device, including handling an obstructing vehicle, handling an obstructed vehicle, moving said obstructing vehicle, moving said obstructed vehicle, relocating said obstructing vehicle, and putting down said obstructed vehicle, and would inherently utilize a computer program to perform such a method, as broadly recited.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hansl, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Morreim (US 2003/0180132, previously cited).
Modified Lui does not show that the size of the at least one column and/or the at least one longitudinal upright is adjustable.
Morreim shows a similar lifting and conveying device 10 comprising a frame 12 which straddles a load to be lifted and transported, wherein each of a plurality of longitudinal and transverse horizontal beams 18, 20 and vertical columns 22 of the frame are telescopic such that the length, width and height of the frame are adjustable.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified the device of Liu by configuring the size of the at least one column and/or the at least one longitudinal upright so as to be adjustable, as taught by Morreim, to adjust to different load sizes while providing a relatively compact size when not in use.
Claims 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hansl, as applied to claims 1 and 17 above, and further in view of Meirer et al (DE 102010052850, previously cited, and corresponding to US 9,702,159).
Modified Liu does not show at least two conveying devices controlled in tandem.
Meirer shows a system for moving and parking vehicles, comprised of at least two conveying devices 1 for moving and parking a vehicle, which can be controlled in tandem to provide shorter waiting times for storage or retrieval of vehicles in the system.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified the device of Liu by providing a vehicle parking system comprised of at least two conveying devices controlled in tandem, as taught by Meirer, to provide shorter waiting times when multiple vehicle storage and/or retrieval requests are simultaneously submitted by users of the system.
Additionally, the examiner notes that the conveying device of Liu as modified is clearly capable of performing a method characterized by controlling the devices in tandem, as broadly recited in claim 19.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Diehl and Cho et al (US 11,214,976) show vehicle lifting devices similar to that of Liu. Liu et al shows a vehicle-attached lifting apparatus substantially equivalent to Hansl and could be substituted therefor in the above rejections.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
Notwithstanding the above, the examiner notes applicant continues to assert that Liu does not disclose a fixing structure fixed to the chains or a mounting support equipped with sliding means, as set forth in claim 1. On the contrary, and as previously stated in prior Office actions, one end of Lui’s chain is fixed to sliding block 6 (see Fig. 2), which in turn is fixed to longitudinal beam 9, thereby enabling the lifting chain to directly raise and lower the longitudinal beam by virtue of sliders 7 of sliding block 6 rolling along a guide structure of column 8. Again, the only elements of claim 1 not disclosed by Liu are a lower pulley arranged at a different height than the upper pulley inside the column, with one of said upper and lower pulleys being motor-driven.
It is also noted that applicant alleges that Liu’s chain is not a looped chain. However, contrary to applicant’s assertion, the claims do not recite the chain as being looped, and in any event, this feature is disclosed by Hansl.
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 James Keenan whose telephone number is (571)272-6925. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ernesto Suarez can be reached on 571-270-5565. 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.
/James Keenan/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3652
2/25/26