DETAILED ACTION Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s amendment filed 2/9/26.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 . Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In the specification, on page 7, Para. 0029, lines 2 and 3, it appears that “end supports 110” should read “end supports 111” and on page 8, lines 2 and 3, it appears that “load hook 112” should read “load hook 114”. On page 9, Para. 0033, lines 2 and 3, it appears that “end supports 204” should read “end supports 111”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informality: On line 4, “the signal conditioning circuit” lacks antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by [Ledent (EP2062845 - See IDS dated 1/9/26).
Regarding claim 1, Ledent discloses an apparatus comprising a winch 1 with a rope 14 wound onto a drum 13, the drum being rotatable to wind and unwind the rope affixed to the load to lift and lower the load; end supports 10 affixing the drum to a lifting machine; and at least one strain gauge 11 affixed to the end supports and measuring a strain applied to the end supports by the load on the rope (See Fig. 2, See Pg. 4, Para. 9 and Pg. 5, Para. 3). Regarding claim 10, the end supports comprise a pair of end supports (See Figs. 2 and 3).7. Claims 1 – 4, 10, 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buckson (3,693,939 – See IDS dated 1/9/26). Regarding claim 1, Buckson discloses an apparatus comprising a winch 12 with a rope 18 wound onto a drum, the drum being rotatable to wind and unwind the rope affixed to the load to lift and lower the load; end supports 16 affixing the drum to a lifting machine; and at least one strain gauge 10A, 10B affixed to the end supports and measuring a strain applied to the end supports by the load on the rope (See Fig. 3, See Col. 2, lines 47 – 64).
Regarding claim 2, a computing circuit C/D (See Fig. 1) receives an electric
signal from the at least one strain gauge that is representative of the strain on the end
supports and converts the signal to an output indicating the weight of the load (See
Col. 2, lines 48 – 68, Col. 3, lines 14 – 28 and Col. 5, lines 21 – 36).
Regarding claim 3, at least one strain gauge comprises a plurality of strain gauges 10A, 10B, each providing an electric signal to the computing circuit that is representative of the strain on the end supports (See Figs. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 4, the computing circuit converts the electric signal from each of the plurality of strain gauges to the output indicating the weight of the load (See Col. 2, lines 48 – 68, Col. 3, lines 14 – 28 and Col. 5, lines 21 – 36).
Regarding claim 10, the end supports comprise a pair of end supports 16 (See Fig. 3). Regarding claim 11, a winch 12 drum is rotated to wind and unwind a winch line to lift and lower a load on the winch line; a pair of end supports 16 hold the winch drum and affix the winch drum to the load lifting machine; at least one strain gauge 10A, 10B is affixed to a first one of the pair of end supports measuring a strain applied to the first one of the pair of end supports by the load on the winch line; and a computing circuit C/D converts the measured strain to an output signal indicative of a weight of the load on the winch line rope (See Fig. 3, See Col. 2, lines 47 – 64).
Regarding claim 16, a weight of a load lifted by a lifting machine is determined utilizing a winch 12 having a rotatable drum winding and unwinding a winch line to lift the load, the winch being mounted to the lifting machine by at least one end support 16, applying at least one strain gauge 10A, 10B to the at least one end support; detecting with the at least one strain gauge a strain on the at least one end support when the load is lifted by the winch; receiving the detected strain gauge with a computing circuit C/D; and converting the detected strain to a weight with the computing circuit (See Fig. 3, See Col. 2, lines 47 – 64). 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.
10. Claims 5 – 7, 12 – 15, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckson in view of Stansloski et al. (2019/0195733, hereinafter Stansloski - See IDS dated 7/12/23).
Regarding claim 5, Buckson discloses an apparatus comprising a winch 12 with a rope 18 wound onto a drum, the drum being rotatable to wind and unwind the rope affixed to the load to lift and lower the load; end supports 16 affixing the drum to a lifting machine; and at least one strain gauge 10A, 10B affixed to the end supports and measuring a strain applied to the end supports by the load on the rope (See Fig. 3, See Col. 2, lines 47 – 64). Buckson fails to disclose that the plurality of strain gages is affixed to the end supports such that strain is measured along a plurality of directions.
However, Stansloski discloses a method and apparatus comprising strain gages that are arranged in a rosette pattern (See Fig. 3B, See Pg. 5, Para. 0111). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 6, Buckson fails to disclose that the plurality of strain gauges is placed in a bridge configuration. However, in Stansloski, the plurality of strain gauges is placed in a bridge configuration (See Figs. 3A – 3D and 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 7, Buckson fails to disclose that the plurality of strain gages comprises a plurality of micro-electro-mechanical strain gauges.
However, in Stansloski, the plurality of strain gauges comprises a plurality of micro-electro-mechanical strain gauges (See Col. 5, lines 29 – 36 and Col. 10, lines 9 - 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 12, Buckson fails to disclose that the strain gauge is a micro-electro-mechanical strain gauge.
However, in Stansloski, the plurality of strain gauges comprises a plurality of micro-electro-mechanical strain gauges (See Col. 5, lines 29 – 36 and Col. 10, lines 9 - 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 13, Buckson fails to disclose at least one additional strain
gauge affixed to the first one of the pair of end supports and measuring the strain
applied to the first one of the pair of end supports by the load on the winch line, the
measured strain from the at least one additional strain gauge being converted by the
signal conditioning circuit, along with the measured strain from the strain gauge, to
generate the output signal indicative of the weight of the load on the winch line.
However, in Stansloski, at least one additional strain gauge is affixed to the first one of the pair of end supports and the strain applied to the first one of the pair of end supports by the load on the winch line is measured, the measured strain from the at least one additional strain gauge being converted by the signal conditioning circuit, along with the measured strain from the strain gauge, to generate the output signal indicative of the weight of the load on the winch line (See Fig. 3B, See Pg. 5, Para. 0111).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 14, Buckson fails to disclose that the strain gage and the at least one additional strain gage are affixed to the first one of the pair of end supports at an angle with respect to one another. However, in Stansloski, the strain gages are arranged in a rosette pattern (See Fig. 3B, See Pg. 5, Para. 0111). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 15, Buckson fails to disclose that the plurality of strain gauges is placed in a bridge configuration. However, in Stansloski, the plurality of strain gauges is placed in a bridge configuration (See Figs. 3A – 3D and 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 17, Buckson fails to disclose that applying a strain gauge comprises applying a plurality of strain gauges at varying angles with respect to one another.
However, in Stansloski, the strain gages are arranged in a rosette pattern (See Fig. 3B, See Pg. 5, Para. 0111). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002). Regarding claim 18, Buckson fails to disclose that applying a strain gauge comprises applying the plurality of strain gauges in a bridge configuration.
However, in Stansloski, the plurality of strain gauges is placed in a bridge configuration (See Figs. 3A – 3D and 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson according to the teachings of Stansloski for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device measures strain to determine performance or detect malfunctions of rotating equipment that uses bearings (See Stansloski, Pg. 1, Para. 0002).11. Claims 8 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckson in view of Fukumori et al. (2019/0119080, hereinafter Fukumori -
See IDS dated 7/12/23).
Regarding claim 8, Buckson fails to disclose a display indicating the weight of
the load.
However, Fukumori discloses an apparatus comprising a display that indicates the weight of the load (See Pg. 4, Para. 0045).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson
according to the teachings of Fukumori for the purpose of, advantageously providing
an improved device since this type of device allows an operator to recognize errors in
work information and the number of turns set in a safety apparatus (See Fukumori,
Pg. 1, Para. 0005).
Regarding claim 9, Buckson fails to disclose that a boom extends away from
the winch, wherein the rope extends from the drum along the boom and the load is
lifted below the extended boom by the rope.
However, in Fukumori, a boom 8 extends away from the winch, wherein the
rope extends from the drum along the boom and the load is lifted below the extended
boom by the rope (See Pg. 2, Para. 0032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson
according to the teachings of Fukumori for the purpose of, advantageously providing
an improved device since this type of device allows an operator to recognize errors in
work information and the number of turns set in a safety apparatus (See Fukumori,
Pg. 1, Para. 0005).12. Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckson and Stansloski, as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Fukumori et al. (2019/0119080, hereinafter Fukumori - See IDS dated 7/12/23). Regarding claim 19, Buckson and Stansloski fail to disclose displaying the weight on a display. However, Fukumori discloses an apparatus comprising a display that indicates the weight of the load (See Pg. 4, Para. 0045).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson
and Stansloski according to the teachings of Fukumori for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device allows an operator to recognize errors in work information and the number of turns set in a safety apparatus (See Fukumori, Pg. 1, Para. 0005).
Regarding claim 20, Buckson and Stansloski fail to disclose logging the weight in a storage medium. However, in Fukumori, a control apparatus 54 logs the weight (See Pg. 7, Para. 0085).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Buckson
and Stansloski according to the teachings of Fukumori for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device allows an operator to recognize errors in work information and the number of turns set in a safety apparatus (See Fukumori, Pg. 1, Para. 0005).
Response to Arguments
13. Applicant's arguments, on Pg. 6, Para. 8 and Pg. 7, Paras. 2 and 4, with
respect to these claims are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
14. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure.
Williams et al. (9,243,965) disclose a system and method for calculating winch line pull. Nakajima et al. (JPS62255365) disclose a cable tension measuring device. 15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2176. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at 5712724107. 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.
/OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 8/30/26
Prosecution Insights