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 . 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stallgiess et al. US 2015/0337505 in view of Mooren DE 102014012043.
Stallgiess et al. disclose a HMA road paver (1) and a method of operating said road paver, the method comprising the steps of:
Providing an HMA road paver (1) having a heated screed (6), a battery, an external
power source coupling, such as a cable drum, an electrical connection to the
road paver onboard network (2) and a control system, including an operator
control panel and screed control device coupled to the onboard battery or
external power source. [0013, 16].
Heating the screed to prevent HMA from cooling while being screeded. [0020,23].
What Stallgiess et al. do not disclose is an electric power monitoring and management system. However, Mooren teaches a heated screed management system comprising:
An electric screed heater, an electric vibration generator, electric motors an electric power generator, a local grid connection device and a control system configured to:
Receive sensor data relevant to voltage/current being supplied by the generator (27) or
the local grid connection.
Receive sensor data relevant to the electric power demands of electric consumers
such as heaters, vibration generators, remote control syncing etc.
Compare electric power demand/supply to set point data and prioritize electric power
supply to priority consumers such as screed heating elements over lower
priority consumers such as vibration generators and motors.
Sequentially provide electric power, through a plurality of switches, to said power
consumers based on said priority designation.
Continually monitor said sensor data until desired temperature range is achieved.
Determine an optimum start time to start the ICE of the road paver for propulsion and
activation of the conveyors, auger etc. See [0020-24, 29-41].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electrically heated screed of
Stallgiess et al. with the electric power management system taught by Mooren et al. in order to minimize peak electric demand and facilitate local grid utilization.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s Rep. argues against the reference to Stallgiess et al., by suggesting in paragraph [0003] that Stallgiess discloses no more than their screed is heated and that “Stallgies is silent on how such heating is achieved an provides no disclosure or suggestion regarding the source of power for heating the screed”.
However, [003] refers to “generic self-propelled road pavers” and not to Stallgeiss’s paving machine. Which is why the Examiner did not refer to [0003].
Rather, the Examiner referred to [0013] which recites --a power source for the supply with electrical power which is separate from the tractor, especially a battery or a power source which is external from the road paver. The power source is then preferably directly arranged on the attachment screed unit--.
Stallgeiss further discloses the screed assembly is not electrically connected to the paving machine proper when operating from the battery or external power source.
Hence it is obvious the external power source and/or the battery provide all electric power to the screed assembly.
Therefore the argument is not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s Rep. then argues against the reference to Mooren by suggesting
“There is no teaching or suggestion in Mooren that the power management system may be applied to batteries or any remote electric power source”.
However the Examiner does not concur.
Mooren teaches it is possible to carry out the preheating of various parts of the paving machine BEFORE the engine and generator (27) are started. Wherein The energy of these heaters is not generated by the engine to be started but taken from separate sources…A LOCAL POWER GRID. See [0011].
Mooren further discloses preheating can be time-controlled and power consumers, such as an electrically heated screed (16) can be pre-heated before the ICE engine is even started. The controller being further configured to check sensor data with target data to control heating, starting and operating the paving machine. [0012-16, 0024, 30-36].
Wherein the heaters are preferably at least partially supplied with electrical energy by another energy source, for example an auxiliary energy source or a stationary energy source.
* Because no page nor paragraph [xxxx] from Mooren was cited to support the arguments; the arguments appear to be conjecture.
Therefore, the argument is not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
With respect to Applicant’s argument with respect to impermissible hindsight reasoning, both references cite electric heaters, external power sources and control systems for heating a various elements of a hot mix asphalt paving machine.
Therefore, the argument is not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
See Attached PTO-892 and reference WO2011/135846 which discloses a paving machine with heated screed, a power plug (61) for obtaining external power, and a control box (24) including a changeover switch (62) for switching between generator (22) and the power plug (61). See Fig. 11.
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.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND W ADDIE whose telephone number is (571)272-6986. The examiner can normally be reached on m-f 7:30-12:30, then 6-9pm.
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, Chris Sebesta can be reached on 571-272-0547. 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 need help 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.
/RAYMOND W ADDIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 2/10/2026