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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “determine that cargo has been removed from the cargo vehicle”; “receive weight data from one or more weight sensors disposed on a cargo vehicle”; and “calibrate the one or more weight sensors based on the empty weight”) read into the prior art of record, i.e. U.S. Patent No. 10,551,241 to Mount et al hereinafter “Mount”.
The applicant argues that “…Mount simply describes weighing the vehicle in multiple different conditions to provide accuracy over a range of weights…For example, in a first loading condition of the vehicle (e.g., empty)….” at Column 8, lines 1-6. The Examiner respectfully disagrees wherein the claimed limitation of the determination that “…cargo has been removed from the cargo vehicle…” is being interpreted as the cargo within the container being removed which results in an empty container or the container being in an empty state as found in Column 8, lines 1-13 of Mount. Claim 1 does not recite the determination of the cargo container as a whole being removed from the vehicle.
Also, the claimed limitation of the calibration of the one or more weight sensors (111 & 116, i.e. scales) being based on the empty weight is cited in Column 7, lines 18-28 & Column 8, lines 1-13 of Mount.
Also, the applicant argues that “…Mount fails to teach, disclose, or suggest a system configured to receive weight data from one or more weight sensors disposed on a cargo vehicle…as recited in Claim 1.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees wherein the claimed limitation of the processor receiving weight data from one or more weight sensors (116, i.e. scale) disposed on a cargo vehicle (110, i.e. trailer) is found in Column 5, lines 11-44 of Mount as seen in Figure 1. The scale (116) are sensors that may include load cells, resistance sensors, air pressure sensors, deflection-type sensors, and/or the like, or any combination of these as stated in Column 5, lines 32-44 of Mount.
For these reasons, the Examiner believes that the claimed limitations, i.e. “determine that cargo has been removed from the cargo vehicle”; “receive weight data from one or more weight sensors disposed on a cargo vehicle”; and “calibrate the one or more weight sensors based on the empty weight”, still reads into the prior art of record.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 7 & 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mount et al (US 10551241 B2) “hereinafter Mount”.
In regards to claim 1, Mount teaches a sensor controller comprising: a processor (304); and a memory (306), the memory (306) having stored thereon computer program code that, when executed by the processor (304), controls the processor (304) to (Column 8, lines 15-52): receive weight data from one or more weight sensors (114 & 116, i.e. scale) disposed on a cargo vehicle (102) (Column 5, lines 32-44); determine that cargo has been removed from the cargo vehicle (102); determine, based on the weight data, an empty weight of the cargo vehicle (102); and calibrate the one or more weight sensors (114 & 116) based on the empty weight (Column 7, line 57 – Column 8, line 13).
In regards to claim 4, Mount teaches wherein the computer program code, when executed by the processor (304), further controls the processor (304) to verify the cargo vehicle (102) is empty, before calibrating the weight sensors (114 & 116), by monitoring vibrations of the cargo vehicle (102) when the cargo vehicle (102) is in motion (Column 5, lines 34-44).
In regards to claim 6, Mount teaches wherein the computer program code, when executed by the processor (304), further controls the processor (304) to: monitor weight data from the one or more weight sensors (114 & 116) over time (Column 6, lines 35-53); and determine cargo unloading times based on changes to the weight data while the cargo vehicle (102) is stopped (Column 6, lines 35-53).
In regards to claim 15, Mount teaches wherein the weight data is received from a plurality of weight sensors (114 & 116) (Column 5, lines 45-63), at least one weight sensor of the plurality of weight sensors (114 & 116) being disposed on each axle of the cargo vehicle (102) (Column 5, lines 20-44).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mount et al (US 10551241 B2) “hereinafter Mount” in view of Watanabe (US 10132674 B2).
In regards to claim 14, Mount teaches the claimed invention except for wherein the sensor controller determines a deflection of the cargo vehicle based on data received from an accelerometer.
Watanabe teaches a loading weight detection device for weighing cargo further comprising a sensor controller (30a, i.e. data processing apparatus) determines a deflection of the cargo vehicle (10) based on data received from an accelerometer (21, i.e. acceleration sensor) (Column 9, lines 15-50).
It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention being made to provide a sensor controller that determines a deflection of the cargo vehicle based on data received from an accelerometer as taught by Watanabe into the sensor controller of Mount for the purpose of providing a loading weight detection device that is applicable to a great variety of mobile bodies, and can accurately detect a loading weight with a minimized number of input variables.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In regards to claims 2, 3, 5, 7, 11 & 16, the reasons for allowance have been previously stated in the office actions filed on 07/09/2025 and 09/23/2024.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JERMAINE L JENKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2179. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-3 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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/J.L.J/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/PETER J MACCHIAROLO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855