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 .
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) 14, 16, 24, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanzler (US8201349B2) in view of Birdwell (US3861534A).
Regarding claim 14, Kanzler discloses a crawler vehicle (1; Figures 1-3) comprising: a frame (column 9, line 1, frame structure); a winch (8) mounted on the frame and configured to selectively unwind and wind a cable (10) anchorable to a point (11) spaced apart from the crawler vehicle (1); an arm (18) configured to guide the cable (10), the arm (18) swivelably mounted with respect to the frame around a determined axis (14); an actuating system (22) of the arm (18); wherein the actuating system (22) comprises an actuator (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 3, hydraulic motor) coupled to the arm (18) for selectively transmitting to the arm (18) a torque around the determined axis (14); and a control device (16) of the actuating system (22) of the arm (18) configured to select an operating mode (column 5, lines 8-18, actuating device is activated by hand wheel or actuating potentiometer) of: enabling a free rotation of the arm (18) around the determined axis (14) when the cable (10) is under tension (column 10, lines 21-43), rotating the arm (18) around the determined axis (14) when the cable (10) is under tension (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 35, adjust orientation of the arm to obtain equilibrium of moments), and locking a position of the arm (18) with respect to the frame when the cable (10) is under tension (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 35; Figure 3, arm is held and locked in position), but fails to teach wherein the actuating system comprises two actuators coupled to the arm for selectively transmitting to the arm respective torques in opposite directions around the determined axis.
Birdwell teaches a similar swivelable arm and further teaches wherein the actuating system (27, 29; Figures 1-2) comprises two actuators (27; column 2, lines 10-18) coupled to the arm (35) for transmitting to the arm (35) respective torques in opposite directions around the determined axis (centerline of ring 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the crawler vehicle of Kanzler to include the two actuators as taught by Birdwell, wherein the actuator for selectively transmitting respective torques of Kanzler is applied to the two actuators of Birdwell in order to provide greater torque and allow for redundancy wherein the swiveling action is still available in case of failure of one of the actuators, and/or provide smaller motors to reduce overall space.
Regarding claim 16, modified Kanzler discloses wherein each actuator (hydraulic motor of Kanzler; 27 of Birwell) is configured to transmit a variable torque between a minimum value and a maximum value (column 5, lines 8-18, torque adjusted by use of actuating potentiometer; column 10, lines 21-43, free rotation, no torque; column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 18, torque exerted to oppose transverse forces).
Regarding claims 24 and 26, modified Kanzler discloses a method to control a winch (8) of a crawler vehicle (1) comprising a frame (column 9, line 1, frame structure), the winch (8) mounted on the frame and configured to selectively unwind and wind a cable (10) anchorable to a point (11) spaced apart from the crawler vehicle (1), an arm (18) configured to guide the cable (10), the arm (10) swivelably mounted with respect to the frame around a determined axis (14), an actuating system (22) of the arm (18) comprising two actuators (27 of Birdwell) coupled to the arm (18), and a control device (16) of the actuating system (22) of the arm (18) configured to select an operating mode (column 5, lines 8-18, actuating device is activated by hand wheel or actuating potentiometer) of: enabling a free rotation of the arm (18) around the determined axis (14) when the cable (10) is under tension (column 10, lines 21-43), rotating the arm (18) around the determined axis (14) when the cable (10) is under tension (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 35, adjust orientation of the arm to obtain equilibrium of moments), and locking a position of the arm (18) with respect to the frame when the cable (10) is under tension (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 35; Figure 3, arm is held and locked in position), the method comprising applying a minimum torque to the arm (18) through each actuator (27 of Birdwell) and opposite to the minimum torque applied by the other actuator (27 of Birdwell; actuators are positioned mirrored to the longitudinal axis of the arm 35 in Figure 2) to enable the arm (18) to align with the cable (10); the method comprising applying a maximum torque to the arm (18) through each actuator (27 of Birdwell) and opposite to the maximum torque applied by the other actuator (27 of Birdwell; actuators are positioned mirrored to the longitudinal axis of the arm 35 in Figure 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the crawler vehicle of Kanzler to include the two actuators as taught by Birdwell in order provide greater torque and allow for redundancy wherein the swiveling action is still available in case of failure of one of the actuators, and/or provide smaller motors to reduce overall space.
Claim(s) 18-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanzler, in view of Birdwell, and in further view of Yao (CN106907376A).
Regarding claims 18-23, Kanzler discloses the above crawler vehicle wherein each actuator (hydraulic motor of Kanzler; 27 of Birwell) comprises a hydraulic motor (column 10, line 64 – column 11, line 3, hydraulic motor) supplied with a pressure variable between a minimum value and a maximum value (column 5, lines 8-18, torque and hydraulic pressure controlled by use of actuating potentiometer and hydraulic proportional valve to control pressure); wherein the actuating system (22) comprises a hydraulic circuit supplied by a pressure source (column 2, lines 46-67, hydraulic energy flows output to control means) and comprising a pressure regulating valve and control device configured to manually control the pressure regulating valve (column 5, lines 8-18, manually controlled hand wheel or actuating potentiometer and a hydraulic proportional valve), but fails to teach a two-way flow hydraulic motor; wherein the actuating system comprises, for the two-way flow hydraulic motor, a direction control valve configured to one of: selectively exclude the supply to the two-way flow hydraulic motor, selectively supply the two-way flow hydraulic motor in a first direction of flow, and selectively supply the two-way flow hydraulic motor in a second direction of flow opposite to the first direction of flow; wherein the control device is configured to control the direction control valve; wherein the control device comprises a joystick.
Yao teaches a similar control system for a swivelable arm and further teaches a two-way flow hydraulic motor (6; Figure 2); wherein the actuating system (4, 6, 10, 15, 17) comprises, for the two-way flow hydraulic motor (6), a direction control valve (10) configured to one of: selectively exclude the supply to the two-way flow hydraulic motor (6; center position of valve 10), selectively supply the two-way flow hydraulic motor (6) in a first direction of flow (left position of valve 10), and selectively supply the two-way flow hydraulic motor (6) in a second direction of flow opposite to the first direction of flow (right position of valve 10); wherein the control device (17) is configured to control the direction control valve (10); wherein the control device (17) comprises a joystick. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the crawler vehicle of Kanzler to include the two-way flow hydraulic motor, actuating system, and control device as taught by Yao in order to provide proper control and adjustability for operating the hydraulic motor to rotate in both directions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/01/2025 with respect to claims 14, 16, 24, and 26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In pages 5-8 and the first three paragraphs of page 9, the applicant argued that the disclosure of Birdwell is non-analogous to Kanzler since Birwell pertains to the field of endeavor and improvements of an underwater lifting crane and Kanzler pertains to the field of endeavor and improvements of a crawler vehicle; argued that the principle of operation of Kanzler is different from that of Birdwell, since the mechanism used to rotate the boom of the crane of Birdwell is not compatible with the cable winch and arm of Kanzler; and further argued that both Kanzler and Birdwell fail to teach wherein the actuating system comprises two actuators coupled to the arm for selectively transmitting to the arm respective torques in opposite directions around the determined axis.
The examiner agrees that the disclosure of Kanzler and Birdwell are in different field of endeavors and overall include different principle of operations. However, the examiner construed that the disclosure of Birdwell is utilized to teach the details of a swiveling boom arm with a winch cable coupled to the boom arm, which is applied to any work machine such as a crane or crawling vehicle, wherein a hydraulic motor drives a gear set coupled to a slewing ring gear platform in order to rotate the boom arm about a vertical axis. Furthermore, the actuating system of the boom arm of Birdwell is arranged similarly to that of Kanzler, therefore, the disclosure of Birdwell can similarly be combined with the disclosure of Kanzler to describe the components and improvement of the arm actuating system of Kanzler. The examiner agrees that Kanzler fails to teach two actuators coupled to the arm for selectively transmitting to the arm respective torques in opposite directions around the determined axis. However, the disclosure of Birdwell teaches two actuators coupled to the arm for transmitting to the arm respective torques in opposite directions around the determined axis. Since the disclosure of Kanzler teaches an actuator that selectively transmits respective torques to the arm for rotating the arm around the determined axis, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the actuating system of Kanzler to include the two actuators of Birdwell, wherein the actuators selectively transmit respective torques to the arm (as taught by Kanzler), in order to provide greater torque and allow for redundancy wherein the swiveling action is still available in case of failure of one of the actuators. Thus, contradicting to applicant’s assertions, such amendment does not overcome the prior art.
Conclusion
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 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 HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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.
/H.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights