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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 3/23/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A in the reply filed on 3/23/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims 1 and 12 differ in a system versus a concrete mixer vehicle and the species refer to two different set of claims. This is not found persuasive because the claims are not the species. The species are directed to: (1) a control system for use in an auxiliary power system of a concrete mixer truck as described in figure 10; and (2) a battery system as described in figure 15. The claims for each species are identified as a way to be helpful when making an election so Applicant knows which claims read on the species. As such, only identifying a preamble difference between two independent claims is not indicative of the species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 12-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 3/23/2026.
Claim 20 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/23/2026.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an energy storage device” in claim 1; and “an auxiliary power unit (APU)” in claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kroschel et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0276577).
Regarding claim 1, Kroschel et al. discloses a concrete mixer vehicle (title), comprising:
a mixer drum assembly (mixing drum 8);
an energy storage device (power supply 2; accumulator 17);
an internal combustion engine (ICE) configured to supply power to the mixer drum assembly (drive engine 1; [0026] (drive engine 1 is an internal combustion engine); see [0026]-[0027] for power connection from ICE 1 to drum 8);
an auxiliary power unit (APU) configured to supply power from the energy storage device to the mixer drum assembly (electric motor 6, clutch 6a; electric lines 15; output shaft of electric motor 16; further drive shaft 16a; [0016]; [0019]; [0030]; [0038]-[0039]); and
an energy management controller configured to engage the APU and disengage the ICE based on a state of charge of the energy storage device (control unit 3, control electronics 3a, power stage 3b; [0015]-[0016]).
Regarding claim 2, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the energy management controller is configured to engage the ICE based on a rotational speed of the mixer drum assembly (rotational speed sensor 9 connected to controller 3 connected to clutch 4 for ICE 1; [0017]; [0035]).
Regarding claim 3, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the energy management controller is configured to engage the ICE for the rotational speed which is in excess of 10 rotations per minute (RPM) (control unit 3; [0015]; [0035]).
Regarding claim 4, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the energy storage device is a battery (accumulator 17; [0019]); and the APU is configured to receive energy from the ICE and convey said energy to charge the battery ([0030]-[0031] (energy from ICE to rotate drum is outputted/generated as energy to the APU from the rotating further drive shaft 16a which is used as a generator for the battery; [0037]; [0043]).
Regarding claim 6, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the energy management controller is configured to disengage the ICE in response to rotational speed of the mixer drum assembly being less than approximately 10 RPM (control unit 3; [0015]).
Regarding claim 7, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the energy management controller is configured to provide energy to engage the ICE (control unit 3 with control lines 15 to engage ICE 1; [0017]; [0026]; [0035]).
Regarding claim 9, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the APU and the ICE are configured to simultaneously exchange energy with the mixer drum assembly ([0021]).
Regarding claim 10, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the APU is disposed within a trailer of the concrete mixer vehicle (abstract; [0034] (although not shown, the parts of the drive, including the APU, are disposed within the motor vehicle/trailer)).
Regarding claim 11, Kroschel et al. discloses wherein the energy management controller is configured to control a throttle of the ICE based on an efficiency associated therewith (adjusting unit 4b; [0026]).
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) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kroschel et al. in view of Takahashi (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2015/0217481).
Regarding claims 5 and 8, Kroschel et al. discloses all the limitations; however, does not disclose wherein the energy received from the APU comprises hydraulic power received via a power-take-off unit and wherein the APU is configured to supply hydraulic power to the mixer drum assembly. While Kroschel et al. uses electrical energy and electrical motor that receives electrical power and supplies electrical power to the mixer drum assembly, it is well known in the art to use hydraulic power for concrete drum mixer vehicles, as evidenced by Takahashi. Takahashi teaches another mixer drum driving apparatus with auxiliary power unit (abstract). Takahashi teaches it is well known in the art that internal combustion engines transmit hydraulic power via power-take off ([0003]; [0020]) and further teaches wherein the energy received from the APU comprises hydraulic power received via a power-take-off unit (see figure 1, pipelines 8 and 11 circulate hydraulic power through auxiliary hydraulic device SD and engine and hydraulic motor 3 operating drum M; [0015]; [0020]); and wherein the APU is configured to supply hydraulic power to the mixer drum assembly (hydraulic motor 3; motor 6 and hydraulic pump 5; [0016]; [0028])). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the power received to and supplied from the APU of Kroschel et al. to be hydraulic power, as taught by Takahashi. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect such a combination to be suitable given that both references teach mixer drum driving apparatuses with auxiliary power units. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do the foregoing because substituting one known power type for another would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing as matter of design choice, and since it is well known in the art to use hydraulic power as the energy to power a mixer drum assembly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-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, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/ELIZABETH INSLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights