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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-15 are currently pending.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. ATA50787/2020, filed on 09/16/2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/02/2023 has been received and considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are accepted.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hursh et al. (US 2734463 A), in view of Plasser et al. (US 3744428 A).
Regarding claim 1, Hursh teaches (Fig. 1-3): A method for tamping a plurality of sleepers (ties T) of a track (R) supported in a ballast bed by means of a plurality of tamping units (150, 151) arranged one behind the other on a machine frame (frame 152; Fig. 3) of a track tamping machine with tamping tools opposite each other in pairs (Fig. 2), with only one sleeper (T) being tamped by means of the respective tamping unit (150, 151) during a tamping process (Fig. 1-2), wherein a control device (manual control; col. 1, lines 40-44) for actuating longitudinal actuators (motor 157 for driving wheels 154 and moving tamper carriages 150, 151; Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 43-53), that, prior to a tamping process, the tamping units (150, 151) are positioned towards each other in the longitudinal direction of the machine by means of the longitudinal actuators (154, 157) in order to adjust the positions of the tamping units (col. 5, lines 43-46), and that sleepers (T) not arranged directly one behind the other are tamped during the tamping process (Fig. 1-2).
Hursh does not explicitly teach that prior to a tamping process, the tamping units’ positions are adjusted to a given sleeper spacing of the sleepers to be tamped.
However, Plasser teaches an alternate sleeper tamping machine, wherein (Fig. 6): prior to a tamping process, a position of a tamping unit (tamping unit 20a) is adjusted to a given sleeper spacing of the sleepers (ties) to be tamped (col. 9, lines 22-25).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for Hursh to adjust the positions of the tamping units based on a given spacing between sleepers, as disclosed by Plasser, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would ensure an optimal and uniform compaction of the ballast for track stability and longevity.
Regarding claim 3, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 1, as stated above. Hursh does not teach that the positions of the sleepers are detected by means of a sensor device arranged on the track tamping machine and that the sleeper spacing is derived from the detected positions.
However, the secondary reference Plasser further teaches (Fig. 1): the positions of the sleepers (25) are detected by means of a sensor device (track sensors 50, 51) arranged on the track tamping machine (1) and that the sleeper spacing is derived from the detected positions (Fig. 1; col. 8, lines 7-20; col. 9, lines 22-25).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for Hursh to adjust the positions of the tamping units based on a given spacing between sleepers derived from a track sensor, as disclosed by Plasser, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would ensure an optimal and uniform compaction of the ballast for track stability and longevity, as well as ensuring the proper relative positioning of the two spaced apart tamping units and are controlled in a known manner (col. 8, lines 7-11).
Regarding claim 8, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 1, as stated above. Hursh further teaches (Fig. 1-3 and 5): for tamping Y-sleepers (T), one rail (R) is tamped using the tamping unit (150) at the very front (Fig. 1-2 and 5), and that the other rail (R) is tamped using the tamping unit (151) positioned behind the very front one (Fig. 1-2 and 5).
Regarding claim 9, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 1, as stated above. Hursh further teaches (Fig. 1-3): for The track tamping machine (Fig. 1) with a plurality of tamping units (150, 151) arranged one behind the other on a machine frame (152) for the simultaneous tamping of a plurality of sleepers (T) of a track (Fig. 2), each tamping unit(150, 151) comprising a tamping tool carrier (cross head 162) adjustable in height by means of a height- adjustment drive (Fig. 3), with tamping tools (167) opposite each other in pairs being mounted on the tamping tool carrier (162)(Fig. 3), which can be set in vibration via drives (col. 8, lines 37-40) and can be squeezed towards each other (Fig. 3), wherein the machine is adapted to carry out a method according to claim 1 in such a way that the tamping units can be shifted towards each other in the longitudinal direction of the machine by means of longitudinal actuators (see rejection of claim 1 above; Fig. 1-3), and that the longitudinal actuators (motor 157 for driving wheels 154 and moving tamper carriages 150, 151; Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 43-53) can be actuated by means of a shared control device (manual control; col. 1, lines 40-44) in order to position the tamping units (150, 151) at a distance from each other which corresponds to a multiple of a given sleeper spacing (Fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 10, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 9, as stated above. Hursh further teaches (Fig. 1-3 and 5): each tamping tool (167) comprises a tamping tine (tamper bits 181) at a lower free end which is vertically aligned in a penetration position (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 11, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 9, as stated above. Hursh further teaches (Fig. 1-3 and 5): a main frame (1) supported on running gears (wheeled trucks 3, 4) is movable on the track (Fig. 1), and that the machine frame (152) with the tamping units (150, 151) is arranged so it can be shifted in relation to the main frame (1) in the longitudinal direction of the machine (Fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 12, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 1, as stated above. Hursh further teaches (Fig. 1-3 and 5): the respective tamping unit (150, 151) is symmetrically constructed with respect to a symmetry plane orthogonal to the longitudinal direction of the machine (Fig. 1-3)
Regarding claim 13, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 1, as stated above. Hursh further teaches (Fig. 1-3 and 5): the tamping units (150, 151) arranged one behind the other are identical in construction (Fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 14, Hursh and Plasser teach the elements of claim 1, as stated above. Hursh further teaches (Fig. 1-3 and 5): each tamping unit (150, 151) comprises a plurality of tamping unit segments arranged next to each other crosswise to the longitudinal direction of the machine (Fig. 5), which are attached to a shared carrier device (162) and, in particular, have tamping tool carriers (162) that can be adjusted in height separately (Fig. 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-7 and 15 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 claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, the prior art fails to teach that progressions of a ballast force acting on the tamping tool over a distance the tamping tool covers are detected during a tamping process for each tamping unit by means of force and/or movement sensors arranged on an associated tamping tool, in order to derive a parameter for compaction control. While Hursh teaches (Fig. 1-3): A pneumatically-actuated rail-gripping means in conjunction with improved manually-controlled hydraulic jack means (col. 1, lines 45-48), the examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Hursh to include force and movement sensors on an associated tamping tool, for detecting a progression of a ballast force acting on the tamping tool over a distance the tamping tool covers, in order to derive a parameter for compaction control. Such a modification would require improper hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 4 and its depending claim(s) 5-6, the prior art fails to teach that a track panel formed of sleepers and rails fixed thereon is lifted and laterally lined prior to tamping by means of a lifting and lining unit, and that a vertical position and a horizontal position of the rails are detected by means of a measuring device positioned in front of the tamping unit at the very front. While Hursh teaches (Fig. 1-3): A method for tamping a plurality of sleepers (ties T) of a track (R) supported in a ballast bed by means of a plurality of tamping units (150, 151) arranged one behind the other on a machine frame (frame 152; Fig. 3), the examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Hursh such that the sleepers and rails are fixed on a track panel to be lifted and laterally lined prior to tamping by means of a lifting and lining unit, and that a vertical position and a horizontal position of the rails are detected by means of a measuring device positioned in front of the tamping unit at the very front. Such a modification would require improper hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art fails to teach that in the case of three tamping units arranged one behind the other at a distance that is double the sleeper spacing, after an initial tamping of sleepers positioned directly one behind the other, all tamping units are moved forward by three sleeper spacings - in the direction of work prior to a tamping process, and that tamping is carried out with all three tamping units during a tamping process. While Hursh teaches (Fig. 1-3): A method for tamping a plurality of sleepers (ties T) of a track (R) supported in a ballast bed by means of a plurality of tamping units (150, 151) arranged one behind the other on a machine frame (frame 152; Fig. 3), the examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Hursh’s two tamping units to three tamping units one behind the other with distances that is double the sleeper spacing, and have all three tamping units moved forward for simultaneous tamping. Such a modification would require improper hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art fails to teach that one of the tamping units arranged one behind the other is fixed to the machine frame and that the other tamping units are mounted on longitudinal guide rods coupled to the machine frame. While Hursh teaches (Fig. 1-3): A method for tamping a plurality of sleepers (ties T) of a track (R) supported in a ballast bed by means of a plurality of tamping units (150, 151) arranged one behind the other on a machine frame (frame 152; Fig. 3); and a control device (manual control; col. 1, lines 40-44) for actuating longitudinal actuators (motor 157 for driving wheels 154 and moving tamper carriages 150, 151; Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 43-53) such that the tamping units (150, 151) are positioned towards each other in the longitudinal direction of the machine, the examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Hursh such that the other tamping units are mounted on longitudinal guide rods coupled to the machine frame. Such a modification would require improper hindsight reasoning.
It is noted that Hursh’s longitudinal actuators (motor 157 for driving wheels 154 and moving tamper carriages 150, 151; Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 43-53) are carriages instead of longitudinal guide rods. It would require an improper amount of hindsight reasoning to modify the moving tamper carriages to have longitudinal guide rods, and further have the guide rods connect to the machine frame of the first tamping unit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure of longitudinally displaceable tamping units for tamping a track: US-3504635-A, US-3687081-A, US-3710721-A, US-4760797-A, US-20070283836-A1, US-9546453-B2, US-11072891-B2, US-11492764-B2, CN-1043179-A.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHENG XI LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6102. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. through Fri. 9:00am to 6:00pm 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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at 5712726684. 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.
/CHENG LIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3615