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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 200-201 and 203-222 in the reply filed on September 22, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 203 is objected to because of the following informalities: There is a misspelling of “valve” in line 9 of the claim language. 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 212 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 212 recites the limitation "the leveling bypass path" in line 6 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 200-201, 203, 211, 213-216, 220, and 222 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (US Patent US 3,807,717) in view of Amano (US Patent Publication US 20060055129 A1).
With regards to Claim 200: Ito teaches a raise lower valve (RLV) comprising: one housing (50) including one or more passages (52 and 52’); one supply seal (51) in the one passage (52); one delivery seal (51’) in the other passage (52’); a first actuator (54) configured to move the one supply seal in the one or more passages; a second actuator (54’) configured to move the one delivery seal in the one or more passages.
Ito teaches controlling the valve in an automatic fashion, but does not teach a controller (C4 L60-65).
Amano teaches a raise lower valve system wherein a controller (160) is configured to move the one or more supply seals (90, 92, 94, and/or 96) and the one or more delivery seals (102 and/or 104) in the one or more passages (seen in Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the raise lower valve disclosed in Ito with the controller taught in Amano with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have automatically controlled the raise lower valve for the operator.
With regards to Claim 201: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches a method performed by the RLV of claim 200, the method comprising: using the controller (Amano 160) to control the first actuator (Ito 54) to move the one supply seal (Ito 51) in the one passage (Ito 52) of the one housing (Ito 50); and using the controller to control the second actuator (Ito 54’) to move the one delivery seal (Ito 51’) in the other passage (Ito 52’).
With regards to Claim 203: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches the RLV of claim 200, wherein, to control the first and second actuators (Ito 54 and 54’) to move the one supply seal (Ito 51) and the one delivery seal (Ito 51’) in the one or more passages (52 and 52’) to allow a leveling valve (Ito 47) to adjust independently the height of a side of a vehicle or a trailer, the RLV is configured to: control the first actuator to position the one supply seal at a neutral position that allows air supplied by one supply tank (Ito 69) to reach the leveling valve; and control the second actuator to position the one delivery seal at a neutral position that allows the first leveling vale to add air to or remove air from one or more air springs on the side of the vehicle or the trailer.
With regards to Claim 211: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches the RLV of claim 200, wherein the controller (Amano 160) is further configured to, in response to a raise input for another side of the vehicle or the trailer, maintain the height of the side of the vehicle or the trailer (Amano para [0035]).
With regards to Claim 213: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches the RLV of claim 200, wherein the controller (Amano 160) is further configured to, in response to a lower input for another side of the vehicle or the trailer, maintain the height of the side of the vehicle or the trailer (Amano para [0035]).
With regards to Claim 214: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches the RLV of claim 213, wherein, to maintain the height of the side of the vehicle or the trailer in response to the lower input for the other side of the vehicle or the trailer, the RLV is configured to: control the first actuator (Ito 54) to position the one supply seal (Ito 51) at a neutral position that blocks air from one or more air springs (Ito 58a-58d) at the side of the vehicle or the trailer from reaching an exhaust port (Ito 53’) of the one housings (Ito 50); and control the second actuator (Ito 54’) to position the one delivery seal (Ito 51’) at a raise position that blocks air from one or more air springs from reaching the leveling valve (Amano para [0035]).
With regards to Claim 215: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches the RLV of claim 200, wherein the RLV is configured to: in response to a leveling valve height control input, allow the first and second leveling valves (at Ito 10 via Ito Fig 2) to adjust independently the heights of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer; in response to a raise input (to Amano target level), raise the height of one or both of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer and prevent the first and second leveling valves from adjusting independently the heights of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer; and in response to a lower input, lower the height of one or both of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer and prevent the first and second leveling valves from adjusting independently the heights of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer (Amano para [0035]).
With regards to Claim 216: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches a system comprising the RLV of Claim 200, a first leveling valve (at Ito 10 on left side via Ito Fig 2) configured to adjust independently a height of a first side of a vehicle or a trailer by increasing or decreasing an amount of air in one or more air springs (Ito 58a-58d) on the first side of the vehicle or trailer; and a second leveling valve (at Ito 10 on right side via Ito Fig 2) configured to adjust independently a height of a second side of the vehicle or the trailer by increasing or decreasing an amount of air in one or more air springs on the second side of the vehicle or trailer (Amano para [0035]).
With regards to Claim 220: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches the system of claim 216, wherein the RLV is further configured to: in response to the raise input (to Amano target level) and a first side input, raise the height of the first side of the vehicle or the trailer and maintain the height of the second side of the vehicle or the trailer; in response to the raise input and a second side input, raise the height of the second side of the vehicle or the trailer and maintain the height of the first side of the vehicle or the trailer; in response to the raise input and a both sides input, raise the height of both the first and second sides of the vehicle; in response to the lower input and the first side input, lower the height of the first side of the vehicle or the trailer and maintain the height of the second side of the vehicle or the trailer; in response to the lower input and the second side input, lower the height of the second side of the vehicle or the trailer and maintain the height of the first side of the vehicle or the trailer; and in response to the lower input and the both sides input, lower the height of both the first and second sides of the vehicle trailer (Amano para [0035]).
With regards to Claim 222: The combination of Ito and Amano et al teaches a method of using the RLV of claim 200, the method comprising: in response to a leveling valve height control input, allowing a first leveling valve (at Ito 10 on left side via Ito Fig 2) to adjust independently a height of a first side of a vehicle or a trailer and a second leveling valve (at Ito 10 on right side via Ito Fig 2) to adjust independently a height of a second side of the vehicle or the trailer; in response to a raise input, raising the height of one or both of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer and preventing the first and second leveling valves from adjusting independently the heights of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer; and in response to a lower input, lowering the height of one or both of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer and preventing the first and second leveling valves from adjusting independently the heights of the first and second sides of the vehicle or the trailer (Amano para [0035]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 204-210, 217-219, and 221 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 212 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ohashi (JP Patent Publication JP 2008037395 A) and Okimura et al (DE Patent Publication DE 102017206908 B4) teach raise lower valve systems for a vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew J Ganci whose telephone number is (571)272-6577. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM to 5:00PM.
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, Paul Dickson can be reached at (571) 272-7742. 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.
/MATTHEW JOSEPH GANCI/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/PAUL N DICKSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614