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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 02/26/26 (hereinafter Response) including claim amendments have been entered. Examiner notes that claim 1 has been amended. In view of amendments, all the objections of claims 5-6 have been withdrawn. Applicant’s amendment necessitated a new ground(s) of rejection under 35 USC § 103 (details below) and claims 1-18 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see [ ‘Remarks’, pages 5-7], filed 02/26/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-18 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered, but are not found persuasive. Therefore, the rejections are maintained and claims 1-18 remain pending on the application.
In view of arguments [‘Remark’, pages 5-7], the applicant submits to introduce a new limitation to claim 1: “the lifting shaft, such that, when the at least one lift linkage is articulated, the at least one lift linkage is brought into mechanical coupling with the lifting shaft” are fully considered; however, in view of further consideration, they are not found persuasive. Wu and Nees’s references each/or in combination disclose the fundamental drivetrain elements relied upon by the examiner, such as a rotating shaft driven by a motor that rotates the lifting shaft on its own rotating axis. Specially, each reference or in combination teaches a mechanical coupling configured to transmit rotational force, a motor or equivalent drive source, and a drive shaft operably connected to the drive components that allows the mechanism to move up and down. Moreover, when considered in combination, the references collectively reinforce the presence of these features, as both documents describe conventional mechanical power-transfer arrangements that inherently include a motor, a coupling interference, and a rotational shaft. Accordingly, the cited art- alone or in combination- reasonably teaches or suggests the claimed limitations of mechanical coupling, motor, and drive shaft etc. The Examiner presents additional evidence from Wu, supporting the updated claim rejections under 35 USC § 103 (details below). Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 is retained and sustained. Also, see the prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure below.
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 1-8 and 11-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nees Daniel (DE 102014100865 A1; hereinafter, “Nees”) in view of Wu Yaohua (CN 203714557 U; hereinafter, “Wu”).
Regarding claim 1, Nees teaches: a lift device (4, fig. 1-4) of a tugger train trailer (fig. 1-4) for raising and lowering a cargo carried in the tugger train trailer [0003], wherein
the lift device (4) comprises at least one lift linkage (vertical rails 12a, 12b or 13a, 13b, [abstract, line 9-11]) which raises and lowers the cargo (fig. 1) is coupled in an articulated manner [‘abstract’ teaches that two vertical rails (12a, 12b or 13a, 13b) spaced apart from one another and the webs (6, 7) of the transport device (4) each adjoin one end of the longitudinal member (5) and have a coupling section (6a, 7a); and is connected to 13a, 13b; thus, coupled in an articulated manner; also, ‘Abstract’ teaches: “two vertical rails (12a, 12b or 13a, 13b) spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction of the vehicle”; note that: transverse direction is the vertical direction of vertical rails and space apart being done on the longitude direction of the vehicle].
Nees teaches shaft (equivalent to longitudinal member 5), lift linkage and the cargo but fails to explicitly teach that a lifting shaft is driven by a drive motor so as to rotate around an axis of rotation and the lift linkage which raise and lowers the cargo is coupled in an articulated manner at a distance from the axis of rotation of the lifting shaft, such that, when the at least one lift linkage is articulated, the at least one lift linkage is brought into mechanical coupling with the lifting shaft; however,
Wu, in another lift device similar to Nees teaches that a lifting shaft (transmission shaft 4-5, fig. 1 and [0032]) is driven by a drive motor (A, annotated fig. 1 below, [0032]) so as to rotate around an axis of rotation (BB', annotated fig. 1 below), and the lift linkage (via 1-2 and 3 [0029]) which raises and lowers the cargo (another cargo of Wu, [0053]) is coupled in an articulated manner at a distance from the axis of rotation (BB') of the lifting shaft, such that, when the at least one lift linkage (either 1 or 2) is articulated (figs. 2 and 3), the at least one lift linkage (1) is brought into mechanical coupling (via 3, figs. 1-3) with the lifting shaft (4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate a lifting shaft of Wu to replace the longitudinal member of Nees and configure a new machine design that are driven by a drive motor that is mounted so as to rotate around its axis of rotation wherein the lift linkage which raise and lowers the cargo is coupled to it in an articulated manner at a distance from the axis of rotation of the lifting shaft, such that, when at least one lift linkage is articulated, the at least one lift linkage is brought into mechanical coupling with the lifting shaft as taught by Wu into the invention of Nees with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize the lifting mechanism that constitutes a mechanical coupling in such that the drive motor can be free of any load condition on the top end of travel position, thereby enhancing mechanical lifting efficiency by distributing balanced load driven by a drive motor in order to improve durability, reliability and reduce manufacturing cost [ see’ abstract’ of Wu]. Such a modification which includes motor, drive shaft, mechanical coupling, linkage mechanism represents a predictable use of known prior art elements according to their established functions that facilitate secure, releasable connections, and the combination yields no unexpected results. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby maintained.
PNG
media_image1.png
506
743
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 1 of Wu
Regarding claim 2, Nees as modified above further teaches the lift device (4), wherein the lift device has at least two lift linkages (12a, 12b or 13a, 13b, claim 1) which are located at a distance (space apart, ‘abstract’, line 3) from one another in the longitudinal direction of the lifting shaft (“transmission shaft” 4-5 of Wu; [‘Abstract’ of Nees teaches: “two vertical rails (12a, 12b or 13a, 13b) spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction of the vehicle”]).
Regarding claim 3, depending on claim 1, Nees as modified above further teaches that the lift linkage is coupled in an articulated manner [‘abstract’ teaches: “two vertical rails (12a, 12b or 13a, 13b) spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction of the vehicle, and the webs (6, 7) of the transport device (4) each adjoin one end of the longitudinal member (5) and have a coupling section (6a, 7a)”; and is connected to mast profile 13a, 13b, thus coupled in an articulated manner] , but fails to teach that the lifting linkage is coupled to a crank arm device located non-rotationally on the lifting shaft.
Wu teaches that the lifting linkage (3) is coupled to a crank arm device (4-7) located non-rotationally (fixed [0037, line 221-223] on the lifting shaft (4-5; [ para. 0012 teaches that “the one end of the crank arm 7 is hinged to the jacking base, and the other end is hinged to the lifting linkage 3: para. 0037 further teaches that lifting shaft 4-5 is hinged on the seated self-aligning bearing 4-6, and a crank arm (4-7) is fixed at the end; it should be noted that ‘fixed’ at the end is being interpretated as non-rotational crank]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a lifting linkage arm that is coupled in to a crank arm device, located non-rotationally on the lifting shaft as taught by Wu into the invention of Nees with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize the lifting structural design which improve the mechanical properties of the crank hinge shaft and can transmit a larger torque, thereby being able to lift heavier goods [para. 0037 of Wu.]
Regarding claim 4, Nees as modified above further teaches the crank arm device (4-7 of Wu); but fails to disclose that has two crank discs located at an axial distance from each other on the lifting shaft, and between which the lift linkage is located.
Wu teaches: the crank arm device has two crank discs (transfers bars, [‘abstract’]) located at an axial distance [annotated fig. 1 above where two crank discs ( C and C') are at axial distance] from each other on the lifting shaft (4-5), and between which the lift linkage is located [‘abstract’ teaches: “the transmission cranks, and transfers bars connected with the transmission crank hinge shafts; the other ends of the transfer bars are connected with the jack-up transfer bars”, thus crank discs are positioned where the lift linkage is located.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a crank arm device that has two crank discs located at an axial distance from each other on the lifting shaft and between which the lift linkage is located as taught by Wu into the invention of Nees with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize the transmission crank mechanism which affects the efficiency and accuracy of the motion transfer. A well-designed transmission system with optimized crank discs that can reduce mechanical strain, improve durability, reliability, and reduced manufacturing cost [‘abstract’ of Wu].
Regarding claim 5, depending on claim 3, Nees as modified above doesn’t appear to explicitly teach that the lift linkage is coupled in an articulated manner to a fastening pin oriented parallel to the axis of rotation on the crank arm device; however,
Wu teaches that the lift linkage is coupled in an articulated manner [ para. 0020] to a fastening pin (D, annotated fig. 1 of Wu above) oriented parallel to the axis of rotation on the crank arm device [ Para 0020 teaches: “the lifting connecting rod adopts a straight plate shape; one end of the lifting crank hinged to the lifting connecting rod adopts a shift fork structure (articulated manner) for clamping the lifting connecting rod”; also annotated fig. 1 above shows pin D is oriented parallel to the axis of rotation on the crank arm device.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a crank arm device that has crank pin oriented parallel to the axis of rotation on the crank arm as taught by Wu into the invention of Nees with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously enhance the performance of the transmission hinge mechanism, minimize friction and wear, ensure optimal load distribution, thereby increase reliability and reduce manufacturing cost. [‘abstract’ of Wu].
Regarding claim 6, depending on claim 1, Nees as modified above teaches the lift linkage (12a, 12b or 13a, 13b), but fails to disclose that lift linkage has a hook-shaped profile in the vicinity of the coupling to the lifting shaft, and is arranged so that the hook-shaped profile is in contact in a top end-of-travel position of the lift linkage with an interior surface on an exterior- surface of the lifting shaft to support the lift linkage on the lifting shaft
Wu teaches that the lift linkage has a hook-shaped profile (shift fork, [0020]) in the vicinity of the coupling (fig. 4) to the lifting shaft (4-5), and is arranged so that the hook-shaped profile is in contact in a top end-of-travel position of the lift linkage with an interior surface on an exterior- surface of the lifting shaft to support the lift linkage on the lifting shaft [para. 0020 teaches that one end of the lifting crank hinged to the lifting connecting rod adopts a shift fork for clamping the lifting connecting rod; also, para. 0013 teaches: “when the lifting transmission rod (lifting shaft) drives the lifting crank, the lifting upper seat moves vertically along the guide shaft”; thus, shift fork (hook) is in contact in a top end-of-travel position of the lift linkage; also fig. 4 shows coupling is in an interior surface on an exterior surface of the lifting shaft.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a hook shaped profile in a vicinity of coupling between the lifting shaft and the lift linkages with an interior surface on an exterior as taught by Wu into the invention of Nees with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize the design where the hook shape coupling distributes forces evenly, helps dampen vibrations and sudden load changes, minimize friction and wear, ensure optimal load distribution, thereby increase reliability and reduce manufacturing cost. [‘abstract’ of Wu].
Regarding claim 7, depending on claim 1, the modified Nees fails to disclose that the drive motor is in an operative connection by a transmission with the lifting shaft; however,
Wu teaches the drive motor (A) is in an operative connection by a transmission with the lifting shaft (4-5, fig. 4, [ ‘abstract’ teaches: “transmission mechanism connecting the motor with a transmission shaft,”; note that transmission shaft is the lifting shaft]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Nees to incorporate the teaching of Wu and obtain the design of lifting mechanism by connecting motor drive to the transmission mechanism in order to advantageously enhance efficiency into the performance of the transmission system, so as to achieve smoother lifting motions, maximized output and reduced manufacturing cost [‘abstract’ of Wu].
Regarding claim 8, depending on claim 1, the modified Nees doesn’t appear to disclose the top end-of-travel position, a dead center interlock is provided between the lift linkage and the lifting shaft; however,
Wu teaches that the top end-of-travel position, a dead center (‘lifting upper seat”; [claim 1]) interlock is provided between the lift linkage and the lifting shaft [claim 1 teaches that “the lifting device for the heavy-load shuttle plate is characterized in that a copper sleeve is installed in the circular hole of the lifting upper seat”; also, see claim 2 of Wu; note that ‘lifting upper seat” is being interpreted as dead center and a copper sleeve is provided to interlock between the lift linkage and the lift shaft; also para. 0013 teaches: “when the lifting transmission rod (lifting shaft) drives the lifting crank, the lifting upper seat moves vertically (a dead center) along the guide shaft”; thus, top end-of-travel position, and a dead center interlock is provided between the lift linkage and the lifting shaft.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Nees to incorporate the teaching of Wu and provide a dead end interlock at the top end-of-travel position between the lift linkage and the lifting shaft in order to advantageously enhance safety, prevent overextension and improve precision during up-lifting which in turn will improve reliability and reduce manufacturing cost [Abstract of Wu].
Regarding claim 11, Nees as modified above further teaches that a sensor device is operatively connected with the lifting shaft (“lifting shaft of Wu) [ see claim 22 where Nees teaches: “the steering device of the axle frame has an electric drive which can be controlled in accordance with a sensor which detects the steering position of the steering device (L1) of the first axle frame (3)”.]
Regarding claim 12, Nees as modified above further teaches that the lifting shaft (4-5 of Wu) is provided with a mechanical interface (“Cam Discs”; [claim 20]) to which a hand tool (“a tool”; [claim 20]) can be applied for the manual actuation (“height-adjustable”; [claim 20]) of the lifting shaft [ Claim 20 teaches that the tugger train trailer is characterized in that the steering device has cam disc (S) coupled to the traction means. It should be noted that Cam Discs is being interpretated as a mechanical interface which can be operated by hand or through mechanical force using a tool, where the user manually rotates or adjusts the cam to control the lifting motion; also, para. 011 teaches: “the transport device can advantageously be height-adjustable compared to the chassis”, thus height-adjustable is ensured when lifting shaft is provided with a mechanical interface to which a hand tool can be applied.]
Regarding claim 13, Nees as modified above further teaches a tugger train trailer with a chassis (1), which has two axle modules (2,3, claim 1) located at a distance (space apart, [claim 1]) from each other in a longitudinal direction [ claim 1, line 3] of the vehicle, and between which cargo being carried is located (via fork 16, fig.2), wherein the tugger train trailer is provided with a lift device (4) [see para. 0001 and claim 1].
Regarding claim 14, depending on claim 13, Nees as modified above further teaches that the tugger train trailer has a bridge frame (6, 7, fig. 4) connecting the axle modules (2, 3, [‘abstract’]) which has vertical supports (1-1, fig. 4) located on the axle module (2,3) and a longitudinal beam (beam of 5, fig. 4) connecting the vertical supports (10, 11, fig. 4) wherein the lifting shaft (4-5 of Wu) of the lift device (1) is rotationally mounted on the longitudinal beam.
Regarding claim 15, Nees as modified above further teaches that the tugger train trailer has a transport device (fork 16, fig.2), to receive the cargo, wherein the transport device is located between (fig. 2) the axle modules (2,3) and can be raised and lowered with respect to the axle modules (2,3) by the lift device (4) , and wherein the lift linkage (12a, 12b or 13a, 13b) of the lift device (4) is operatively connected with the transport device (16, [ See claim 23 and, also claim 5, 9 and fig. 2.])
Regarding claim 16, Nees as modified above further teaches that the transport device (16, fig.2), is located on the axle modules (2, 3) by respective vertical guides (lifting unit H, fig. 4, [claim 4]) so that the transport device can be raised and lowered [0014].
Regarding claim 17, depending on claim 15, Nees as modified above further teaches that the transport device has a platform to drive on dollies that have rollers, wherein the dollies are supported on the platform with rollers [see annotated fig. 2 below where there is a taper portion on the transport device 16, thus forming a platform to drive on dollies that have rollers upon contact with the floor.]
PNG
media_image2.png
537
735
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 2 of Nees
Regarding claim 18, Nees as modified above further teaches that the transport device has positioning forks to receive the cargo [Claim 9 teaches: “tugger train trailer, characterized in that at least one fork (16) can be fastened to the longitudinal member”; also see fig. 2 where plurality of positioning members 16 forming a fork to receive the cargo.]
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nees in view of Wu and further in view of Zhang Ke (CN104591046 A; hereinafter, “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 9, Nees as modified above includes all the limitations of claim 1 including lifting shaft, but doesn’t appear to explicitly teach that the lifting shaft is in the form of a spline shaft or an involute spline shaft; however,
Zhang in another pallet fork clamping machine similar to Nees teaches: “spline shaft 7 are symmetrically arranged between the two side plates of the frame 1”; see ‘abstract’ and para 0021 and fig. 2 of Zhang.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Nees in view of Wu to incorporate the teaching of Zhang and provide spline shaft into the lifting mechanism in order to advantageously enhance efficient torque transmission and 1operates reliably and stably [‘abstract’ of Zhang].
Regarding claim 10, depending on claim 9, Nees as modified above doesn’t appear to explicitly disclose that the crank arm device is provided with a hub profile that interacts in a complementary manner with the spline shaft or involute spline shaft; however,
Zhang, in another lifting device similar to Nees teaches that the crank arm device (2) is provided with a hub profile ( spline-shaped sleeve 12, fig. 2; [0013, 0016, 0017) that interacts in a complementary manner with the spline shaft (7) or involute spline shaft [“Abstract” teaches: “a spline shaft is arranged between the two side plates (2) of the machine frame”; note that: shown in fig. 2, the two side plates are being interpretated as a ‘crank arm device’ as disclosed by the ‘abstract’; also, para. 0025 further teaches: “when the movable plates 2 move closer to the inside to a certain position, the spline sleeve 12 engages with the spline on the spline shaft 7, and the rotation of the first drive motor 10 drives the spline shaft 7 to rotate”; it should be noted that the crank arm device 2, featuring a spline-shaped sleeve 12, engages with the spline shaft 7 in a way that corresponds to the hub profile of the crank arm. This interaction ensures a complementary connection with the spline shaft, facilitating smooth rotational movement, thus hub profile that interacts in a complementary manner with the spline shaft.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Nees to incorporate the teaching of Zhang and provide the crank arm device with a hub profile that interacts in a complementary manner with the spline shaft in order to advantageously enhance stability with improved torque transmission and operates reliably and stably [‘abstract’ of Zhang].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 203112421 U to Wang discloses: the differential type of two-dimensional transplantation device comprises a machine frame and a vertically lifting differential device, wherein the vertically lifting differential device is arranged on the machine frame, a horizontal differential device is arranged at the top end of the vertically lifting differential device, and a goods fork is arranged at the front end of the horizontal differential device.
CN 204473735 U to Li discloses: the utility model relates to a periodic two-way transmission device. Including motor, motor base, bolt, coupling, driving shaft, small bevel gear, large bevel gear, tapered shaft, crank, base, guide rod seat, guide rod, cylindrical gear, connecting shaft bracket, screw, workbench, rack, connecting shaft, push plate, connecting rod, guide groove, the motor is connected with the driving shaft through a coupling.
CN 205274603 U to Jin discloses: under the action of the longitudinal movement module, the truss module moves longitudinally; the truss module includes a beam, and a first motor fixed in the middle of the beam, and the first motor is connected with two coaxial transmission shafts on the left and right through a reducer.
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 extension fee 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 NABIN KUMAR SHARMA whose telephone number is (703)756-4619. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Friday: 8:00am - 5 PM EST.
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, Koppikar, Vivek can be reached on 571-272-7109. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
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.
/NABIN KUMAR SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/VIVEK D KOPPIKAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3612
May 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights