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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed June 1st, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7-10, and 21-31 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the previous 112(b), 112(d), and claim objections previously set forth in the Final Action sent out on April 1st, 2026.
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.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fast et al. (US Patent 10,798,865) in view of Giles et al. (US Patent 5,134,961) and Oberheide et al. (US 20220264859 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Fast discloses a system (entire system, Figs. 15-19) for a boom assembly (30, 80, Fig. 1) comprising:
a cylinder (166, first lateral actuator is a dual action hydraulic cylinder, Fig. 4, Col. 8, Ln. 10-24) including a piston (174, Fig. 4) and a housing (172, 168, Fig. 4), the cylinder operably coupled between a first boom section (84, shown in Fig. 4) and a second boom section (112, shown in Fig. 4) of the boom assembly (30, 80, first lateral actuator 166 bridges the center section 84 and the inner wing section 112, Fig. 1, Col. 8, Ln. 10-24);
a control circuit (384, 386, Fig. 15) fluidly coupled with the cylinder (166, lateral actuator 166 is powered by a hydraulic source and return lines 384, 386, shown in Fig. 15, Col. 13, Ln. 38-44), the control circuit (384, 386, Fig. 15) comprising:
a directional control valve (SCV1, Fig. 15) configured to control a position of the cylinder (first selective control valve SCV1 changes configurations of the hydraulic source/return lines 384, 386 connected to lateral actuator 166, shown in Fig. 15, Col. 13, Ln. 38-44, Col. 14, Ln. 4-13);
a first pressure relief assembly (388, 394, Fig. 15) including a first pressure relief valve (relief cartridge 388 serves as a pressure relief valve, Col. 15, Ln. 15-41) operably coupled with a rod side (174, Figs. 4, 17) of the housing (172, 168, relief cartridge 388 connects to piston shaft 174 through pressure lines 394, 396 and base end chamber 406, where the fluid from the pressure lines 394, 396 is delivered to the base end chamber 406 to exert a laterally outward force on the piston shaft 174 that ram end 172 accommodates, Figs. 4, 15, 17, Col. 15, Ln. 1-14); and
a second pressure relief assembly (390, 396, Fig. 15) including a second pressure relief valve (relief cartridge 390 serves as a pressure relief valve, Col. 15, Ln. 15-41) operably coupled with a base side (406, Fig. 17) of the housing (172, 174, 168, 406, relief cartridge 390 connects to base end chamber 406 of lateral actuator 166 through pressure lines 394, 396, Figs, 4, 15, 17, Col. 15, Ln. 1-14).
However, Fast does not disclose a computing system as claimed. Giles teaches a computing system (22, 34, Fig. 1) communicatively coupled to the first pressure relief valve (35, Figs. 2-3), the computing system (22, 34, Fig. 1) being configured to:
determine a nominal pressure of the cylinder (shown in Fig. 2, controller 22 sets liquid supply pressure to each valve/nozzle 12 at a nominal nozzle operating point, Col. 7, Ln. 48-61).
Fast and Giles are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for agricultural sprayers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the computing system taught in Giles’ system to Fast’s system, so that Fast can have a computing system communicatively coupled to the first pressure relief valve and the second pressure relief valve and the computing system being configured to determine a nominal pressure of the cylinder, to have the motivation to increase the accuracy and efficiency of pesticide application processes to reduce potential environmental pollution and decrease the overall amount of chemical applied (Giles, Col. 1, Ln. 36-52).
calculate a pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder; and
calculate a pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder.
However, Fast and Giles do not teach the computing system being configured to:
determine a dynamic change of the cylinder, wherein the dynamic pressure is based on a reactive pressure change for the cylinder in response to actuation of one or more additional cylinders positioned along the boom assembly;
calculate a pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder; and
calculate a pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder.
Oberheide teaches the computing system (“control unit”, Paragraph 0030) being configured to:
determine a dynamic change of the cylinder, wherein the dynamic pressure is based on a reactive pressure change for the cylinder in response to actuation of one or more additional cylinders positioned along the boom assembly (motions of a boom and the associated intermediate frame can transfer corresponding forces to the respective hydraulic actuating device, which reflect changes in pressure in the hydraulic actuating device, which can be detected by pressure sensors, Paragraph 0022);
calculate a pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based at least partially on a nominal pressure and a dynamic pressure of the cylinder (interpreting nominal as of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual: approximate and interpreting dynamic as marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, hydraulic valves can be set to a setpoint value using a characteristic curve describing a relationship between a pressure and an associated electrical current of the valve and determined based on information from the pressure sensors, and the control unit can control the at least one hydraulic valve so a setpoint pressure prevails at a hydraulic damping element, Paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0030); and
calculate a pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder (control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, hydraulic valves can be set to a setpoint value using a characteristic curve describing a relationship between a pressure and an associated electrical current of the valve and determined based on information from the pressure sensors, and the control unit can control the at least one hydraulic valve so a setpoint pressure prevails at a hydraulic damping element, Paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0030).
Fast, Giles, and Oberheide are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for agricultural sprayers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the computing system taught in Oberheide’s system to Fast’s system, as modified by Giles above, to prevent the damping systems from operating unreliably in driving conditions such as when the apparatus accelerates or brakes sharply, or cornering (Oberheide, Paragraphs 0005-0006).
In regards to claim 5, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 1. Fast further discloses wherein the boom assembly (30, 80, Fig. 1) is cantilevered above a ground surface (shown in Fig. 1).
Oberheide further teaches the dynamic pressure is based on a look-up table that maps the reactive pressure change for the cylinder in response to the actuation of the one or more additional cylinders positioned along the boom assembly (pressure can be determined and electronically controlled using a characteristic curve that describes the relationship between pressure and the associated electrical current at the valve, and damping assembly can be controlled by the regulating device to control the hydraulic valves to a setpoint pressure to account for a plurality of hydraulic damping elements so that the setpoint pressure prevails at the respective hydraulic damping elements, Paragraphs 0023, 0030).
With respect to claim 7, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 5. Oberheide further teaches the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is based at least partially on an overrunning pressure that is configured to resist an overrunning load in the cylinder, wherein the overrunning pressure is determined by comparing a velocity or a net force of the cylinder with a magnitude and a direction of an actuator command (when a control signal is applied, the spring load in the valve is counteracted electromagnetically and pressure can be maintained according to the control characteristic of the valve, and desired control characteristics can be stored in the control unit for calculating and outputting control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, Paragraph 0020).
Regarding claim 8, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 1. However, Fast and Giles do not teach a first pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the first pressure relief valve.
Oberheide teaches a system (10, Figs. 1a-1c) comprising the first pressure relief assembly (not explicitly shown, but a respective hydraulic valve can be associated with the first hydraulic actuating device 14, Paragraph 0039) further includes a first pressure sensor (not explicitly shown, but the sensor device can comprise one or more pressure sensors that are associated with specific hydraulic devices, Paragraphs 0026, 0038) fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the first pressure relief valve (pressure sensors detect pressure or change in pressure in the hydraulic damping element and are associated with specific hydraulic devices, and motions of a boom or frame can transfer corresponding forces to the hydraulic devices which changes the pressure, Paragraphs 0026-0027, 0038).
Fast, Giles, and Oberheide are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for boom assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the first pressure sensor taught in Oberheide’s system to Fast’s system, as modified by Giles, to prevent the damping systems from operating unreliably in driving conditions such as when the apparatus accelerates or brakes sharply, or cornering (Oberheide, Paragraphs 0005-0006).
Regarding claim 9, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 8. Oberheide further teaches the second pressure relief assembly (not explicitly shown, but a respective hydraulic valve can be associated with the second hydraulic actuating device 15, Paragraph 0039) further includes a second pressure sensor (not explicitly shown, but the sensor device can comprise one or more pressure sensors that are associated with specific hydraulic devices, Paragraphs 0026, 0038) fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the second pressure relief valve (pressure sensors detect pressure or change in pressure in the hydraulic damping element and are associated with specific hydraulic devices, and motions of a boom or frame can transfer corresponding forces to the hydraulic devices which changes the pressure, Paragraphs 0026-0027, 0038).
In regards to claim 10, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 5. Oberheide teaches the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve and the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve are each established based on a stress/strain curve for the boom assembly (control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure value based on any desired control characteristics, which may be based on a stress/strain curve for the boom assembly, Paragraph 0020).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fast et al. (US Patent 10,798,865) in view of Giles et al. (US Patent 5,134,961) and Oberheide et al. (US 20220264859 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takaharu et al. (JP 4368508 B2).
In regards to claim 2, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 1. However, Fast, Giles, and Oberheide do not teach the first pressure relief valve is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the first pressure relief valve based on the pressure setpoint, wherein the pressure setpoint is increased as a distance of the piston increases from a default position.
Takaharu teaches a system (1, Fig. 1) comprising a pressure relief valve (4, Figs. 1, 4) is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the pressure relief valve based on the pressure setpoint (relief valve 4 is an electromagnetic proportional relief valve where relief pressure is changed based on an external signal to a set relief pressure, and when the command signal/current is passed through the relief valve 4, the total spring force is adjusted proportionally based on the signal, and the pressure is adjusted proportionally to the total spring force, Paragraphs 0042, 0050), wherein the pressure setpoint is increased as a distance of the piston increases from a default position (when the command signal/current is passed through the relief valve 4, the total spring force is adjusted proportionally based on the signal, which adjusts the displacement of the valve from an initial position and causes the pressure to adjust proportionally to the total spring force, and as displacement increases, the pressure increases, Paragraph 0050).
Fast, Giles, Oberheide, and Takaharu are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fluid valve systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the relief valve taught in Takaharu’s system to Fast’s first pressure relief valve, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, to improve the stability of the discharge pressure by controlling the relief valve (Takaharu, Paragraphs 0006-0010).
In regards to claim 3, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 1. However, Fast, Giles, and Oberheide do not teach the second pressure relief valve is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the second pressure relief valve based on the pressure setpoint, wherein the pressure setpoint is increased as a distance of the piston increases from a default position.
Takaharu teaches a system (1, Fig. 1) comprising a pressure relief valve (4, Figs. 1, 4) is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the pressure relief valve based on the pressure setpoint (relief valve 4 is an electromagnetic proportional relief valve where relief pressure is changed based on an external signal to a set relief pressure, and when the command signal/current is passed through the relief valve 4, the total spring force is adjusted proportionally based on the signal, and the pressure is adjusted proportionally to the total spring force, Paragraphs 0042, 0050), wherein the pressure setpoint is increased as a distance of the piston increases from a default position (when the command signal/current is passed through the relief valve 4, the total spring force is adjusted proportionally based on the signal, which adjusts the displacement of the valve from an initial position and causes the pressure to adjust proportionally to the total spring force, and as displacement increases, the pressure increases, Paragraph 0050).
Fast, Giles, Oberheide, and Takaharu are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fluid valve systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the relief valve taught in Takaharu’s system to Fast’s second pressure relief valve, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, to improve the stability of the discharge pressure by controlling the relief valve (Takaharu, Paragraphs 0006-0010).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fast et al. (US Patent 10,798,865) in view of Giles et al. (US Patent 5,134,961) and Oberheide et al. (US 20220264859 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Raymond (US Patent 4,055,197).
With respect to claim 4, Fast, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 1. However, Fast, Giles, and Oberheide do not teach a current pressure of the first pressure relief valve is defined along a first pressure curve and a current pressure of the second pressure relief valve is defined along a second pressure curve, the first pressure curve varied from the second pressure curve.
Raymond teaches a system (entire system, Figs. 1-3) comprising a current pressure of the first pressure relief valve is defined along a first pressure curve (curve corresponding to 4 GPM, shown in Fig. 5) and a current pressure of the second pressure relief valve is defined along a second pressure curve (curve corresponding to 20 GPM, shown in Fig. 5), the first pressure curve varied from the second pressure curve (shown in Fig. 5).
Fast, Giles, Oberheide, and Raymond are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fluid valve systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the first pressure curve and the second pressure curve taught in Raymond’s system to Fast’s system, as modified by Giles and Oberheide, to provide a system with improved reliability, stability, high regulation accuracy, and a wide pressure range (Raymond, Col. 1, Ln. 63-67).
Claims 21-25 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fast et al. (US Patent 10,798,865) in view of Oberheide et al. (US 20220325774 A1) and Grosse Prues (US 20220225602 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Fast discloses a system (entire system, Figs. 15-19) for a boom assembly (30, 80, Fig. 1) comprising:
a cylinder (166, first lateral actuator is a dual action hydraulic cylinder, Fig. 4, Col. 8, Ln. 10-24) including a piston (174, Fig. 4) and a housing (172, 168, Fig. 4), the cylinder operably coupled between a first boom section (84, shown in Fig. 4) and a second boom section (112, shown in Fig. 4) of the boom assembly (30, 80, first lateral actuator 166 bridges the center section 84 and the inner wing section 112, Fig. 1, Col. 8, Ln. 10-24);
a control circuit (384, 386, Fig. 15) fluidly coupled with the cylinder (166, lateral actuator 166 is powered by a hydraulic source and return lines 384, 386, shown in Fig. 15, Col. 13, Ln. 38-44), the control circuit (384, 386, Fig. 15) comprising:
a directional control valve (SCV1, Fig. 15) configured to control a position of the cylinder (first selective control valve SCV1 changes configurations of the hydraulic source/return lines 384, 386 connected to lateral actuator 166, shown in Fig. 15, Col. 13, Ln. 38-44, Col. 14, Ln. 4-13);
a first pressure relief assembly (388, 394, Fig. 15) including a first pressure relief valve (relief cartridge 388 serves as a pressure relief valve, Col. 15, Ln. 15-41) operably coupled with a rod side (174, Figs. 4, 17) of the housing (172, 174, 168, 406, relief cartridge 388 connects to piston shaft 174 through pressure lines 394, 396 and base end chamber 406, where the fluid from the pressure lines 394, 396 is delivered to the base end chamber 406 to exert a laterally outward force on the piston shaft 174 that ram end 172 accommodates, Figs. 4, 15, 17, Col. 15, Ln. 1-14); and
a second pressure relief assembly (390, 396, Fig. 15) including a second pressure relief valve (relief cartridge 390 serves as a pressure relief valve, Col. 15, Ln. 15-41) operably coupled with a base side (406, Fig. 17) of the housing (172, 174, 168, 406, relief cartridge 390 connects to base end chamber 406 of lateral actuator 166 through pressure lines 394, 396, Figs, 4, 15, 17, Col. 15, Ln. 1-14).
However, Fast does not disclose a computing system communicatively coupled to the first pressure relief valve and the second pressure relief valve, the computing system being configured to:
determine a pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based at least partially on a nominal pressure and a dynamic pressure of the cylinder; and
determine a pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder.
Oberheide teaches a system (10, Figs. 1a-1c) comprising:
a computing system (“control unit”, Paragraph 0030) communicatively coupled to the first pressure relief valve (not explicitly shown, but a respective hydraulic valve can be associated with the first hydraulic actuating device 14, and control unit actuates at least one hydraulic valve based on sensor values, Paragraphs 0030, 0039) and the second pressure relief valve (not explicitly shown, but a respective hydraulic valve can be associated with the second hydraulic actuating device 15, and control unit actuates at least one hydraulic valve based on sensor values, Paragraphs 0030, 0039), the computing system (“control unit”, Paragraph 0030) being configured to:
determine a pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based at least partially on a nominal pressure and a dynamic pressure of the cylinder (interpreting nominal as of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual: approximate and interpreting dynamic as marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, hydraulic valves can be set to a setpoint value using a characteristic curve describing a relationship between a pressure and an associated electrical current of the valve and determined based on information from the pressure sensors, and the control unit can control the at least one hydraulic valve so a setpoint pressure prevails at a hydraulic damping element, Paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0030); and
determine a pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder (control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, hydraulic valves can be set to a setpoint value using a characteristic curve describing a relationship between a pressure and an associated electrical current of the valve and determined based on information from the pressure sensors, and the control unit can control the at least one hydraulic valve so a setpoint pressure prevails at a hydraulic damping element, Paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0030).
Fast and Oberheide are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for boom assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the computing system taught in Oberheide’s system to Fast’s system, to prevent the damping systems from operating unreliably in driving conditions such as when the apparatus accelerates or brakes sharply, or cornering (Oberheide, Paragraphs 0005-0006).
However, Fast and Oberheide do not teach wherein the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is chosen along a first pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the cylinder, wherein the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve is chosen along a second pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the cylinder, and wherein the first pressure curve is varied from the second pressure curve.
Gross Prues teaches wherein the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is chosen along a first pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the cylinder (output signal for the valve opening for setting the hydraulic pressure at hydraulic cylinder 10a can be generated based on a characteristic curve, which can be used to determine a conversion for the valve flow required for folding and unfolding or for retracting and extending the cylinder, Paragraph 0069), wherein the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve is chosen along a second pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the cylinder (output signal for the valve opening for setting the hydraulic pressure at hydraulic cylinder 10b can be generated based on a characteristic curve, which can be used to determine a conversion for the valve flow required for folding and unfolding or for retracting and extending the cylinder, Paragraph 0069), and wherein the first pressure curve is varied from the second pressure curve (characteristic curves of hydraulic cylinders 10a and 10b may be varied and assigned individually, Paragraph 0069).
Fast, Oberheide, and Grosse Prues are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for boom assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the computing system taught in Grosse Prues’ system to Fast’s system, as modified by Oberheide, to specify a reliable control and regulating system for an agricultural device, to obtain precise damping of vibrations (Grosse Prues, Paragraph 0011).
Regarding claim 22, Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Grosse Prues, discloses the system of claim 21, Oberheide further teaches wherein the dynamic pressure is based on a look-up table that maps a reactive pressure change for the cylinder in response to actuation of one or more additional cylinders positioned along the boom assembly (pressure can be determined and electronically controlled using a characteristic curve that describes the relationship between pressure and the associated electrical current at the valve, and damping assembly can be controlled by the regulating device to control the hydraulic valves to a setpoint pressure to account for a plurality of hydraulic damping elements so that the setpoint pressure prevails at the respective hydraulic damping elements, Paragraphs 0023, 0030).
With respect to claim 23, Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Grosse Prues, discloses the system of claim 21. Oberheide further teaches the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is based at least partially on an overrunning pressure that is configured to resist an overrunning load in the cylinder (when a control signal is applied, the spring load in the valve is counteracted electromagnetically and pressure can be maintained according to the control characteristic of the valve, and desired control characteristics can be stored in the control unit for calculating and outputting control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, Paragraph 0020).
In regards to claim 24, Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Grosse Prues, discloses the system of claim 21. However, Fast does not disclose a first pressure sensor as claimed.
Oberheide teaches a system (10, Figs. 1a-1c) comprising the first pressure relief assembly (not explicitly shown, but a respective hydraulic valve can be associated with the first hydraulic actuating device 14, Paragraph 0039) further includes a first pressure sensor (not explicitly shown, but the sensor device can comprise one or more pressure sensors that are associated with specific hydraulic devices, Paragraphs 0026, 0038) fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the first pressure relief valve (pressure sensors detect pressure or change in pressure in the hydraulic damping element and are associated with specific hydraulic devices, and motions of a boom or frame can transfer corresponding forces to the hydraulic devices which changes the pressure, Paragraphs 0026-0027, 0038).
Fast and Oberheide are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for boom assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the first pressure sensor taught in Oberheide’s system to Fast’s system, to have the first pressure relief assembly further includes a first pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the first pressure relief valve. Doing so prevents damping systems from operating unreliably in driving conditions such as when the apparatus accelerates or brakes sharply, or cornering (Oberheide, Paragraphs 0005-0006).
In regards to claim 25, Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Grosse Prues, discloses the system of claim 21. Oberheide further teaches the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve and the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve are each established based on a stress/strain curve for the boom assembly (control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure value based on any desired control characteristics, which may be based on a stress/strain curve for the boom assembly, Paragraph 0020).
Regarding claim 30, Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Grosse Prues, discloses the system of claim 24. Oberheide further teaches the second pressure relief assembly (not explicitly shown, but a respective hydraulic valve can be associated with the second hydraulic actuating device 15, Paragraph 0039) further includes a second pressure sensor (not explicitly shown, but the sensor device can comprise one or more pressure sensors that are associated with specific hydraulic devices, Paragraphs 0026, 0038) fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the second pressure relief valve (pressure sensors detect pressure or change in pressure in the hydraulic damping element and are associated with specific hydraulic devices, and motions of a boom or frame can transfer corresponding forces to the hydraulic devices which changes the pressure, Paragraphs 0026-0027, 0038).
Claims 26, 28-29, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fast et al. (US Patent 10,798,865) in view of Oberheide et al. (US 20220325774 A1), Grosse Prues (US 20220225602 A1), and Takaharu et al. (JP 4368508 B2).
Regarding claim 26, Fast discloses a system (entire system, Figs. 15-19) for a boom assembly (30, 80, Fig. 1) comprising:
a cylinder (166, first lateral actuator is a dual action hydraulic cylinder, Fig. 4, Col. 8, Ln. 10-24) including a piston (174, Fig. 4) and a housing (172, 168, Fig. 4), the cylinder operably coupled between a first boom section (84, shown in Fig. 4) and a second boom section (112, shown in Fig. 4) of the boom assembly (30, 80, first lateral actuator 166 bridges the center section 84 and the inner wing section 112, Fig. 1, Col. 8, Ln. 10-24);
a control circuit (384, 386, Fig. 15) fluidly coupled with the cylinder (166, lateral actuator 166 is powered by a hydraulic source and return lines 384, 386, shown in Fig. 15, Col. 13, Ln. 38-44), the control circuit (384, 386, Fig. 15) comprising:
a directional control valve (SCV1, Fig. 15) configured to control a position of the cylinder (first selective control valve SCV1 changes configurations of the hydraulic source/return lines 384, 386 connected to lateral actuator 166, shown in Fig. 15, Col. 13, Ln. 38-44, Col. 14, Ln. 4-13);
a first pressure relief assembly (388, 394, Fig. 15) including a first pressure relief valve (relief cartridge 388 serves as a pressure relief valve, Col. 15, Ln. 15-41) operably coupled with a rod side (174, Figs. 4, 17) of the housing (172, 174, 168, 406, relief cartridge 388 connects to piston shaft 174 through pressure lines 394, 396 and base end chamber 406, where the fluid from the pressure lines 394, 396 is delivered to the base end chamber 406 to exert a laterally outward force on the piston shaft 174 that ram end 172 accommodates, Figs. 4, 15, 17, Col. 15, Ln. 1-14); and
a second pressure relief assembly (390, 396, Fig. 15) including a second pressure relief valve (relief cartridge 390 serves as a pressure relief valve, Col. 15, Ln. 15-41) operably coupled with a base side (406, Fig. 17) of the housing (172, 174, 168, 406, relief cartridge 390 connects to base end chamber 406 of lateral actuator 166 through pressure lines 394, 396, Figs, 4, 15, 17, Col. 15, Ln. 1-14); and
a computing system communicatively coupled to the first and second pressure relief valves and the first and second pressure sensors, the computing system being configured to:
determine a pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based at least partially on a nominal pressure and a dynamic pressure of the cylinder, wherein the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is chosen along a first pressure curve based at least in part on a position of the piston;
determine a pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder, wherein the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve is chosen along a second pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the piston, and wherein the first pressure curve is varied from the second pressure curve;
adjust the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based on data from the first pressure sensor, wherein the pressure setpoint is increased along the first pressure curve as a distance of the piston increases from a default position; and
adjust the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based on data from the second pressure sensor, wherein the pressure setpoint is increased along the second pressure curve as the distance of the piston increases from the default position.
Fast discloses all aspects of the claimed invention except for a first pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the first pressure relief assembly, a second pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the second pressure relief assembly, and a computing system.
Oberheide teaches a first pressure sensor (not explicitly shown, but the sensor device can comprise one or more pressure sensors that are associated with specific hydraulic devices, Paragraphs 0026, 0038) fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the first pressure relief valve (pressure sensors detect pressure or change in pressure in the hydraulic damping element and are associated with specific hydraulic devices, and motions of a boom or frame can transfer corresponding forces to the hydraulic devices which changes the pressure, Paragraphs 0026-0027, 0038); and
a second pressure sensor (not explicitly shown, but the sensor device can comprise one or more pressure sensors that are associated with specific hydraulic devices, Paragraphs 0026, 0038) fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the second pressure relief valve (pressure sensors detect pressure or change in pressure in the hydraulic damping element and are associated with specific hydraulic devices, and motions of a boom or frame can transfer corresponding forces to the hydraulic devices which changes the pressure, Paragraphs 0026-0027, 0038); and
a computing system (“control unit”, Paragraph 0030) communicatively coupled to the first and second pressure relief valves (not explicitly shown, but a respective hydraulic valve can be associated with the first hydraulic actuating device 14 and second hydraulic actuating device 15, and control unit actuates at least one hydraulic valve based on sensor values, Paragraphs 0030, 0039) and the first and second pressure sensors (Paragraph 0018), the computing system (“control unit”, Paragraph 0030) being configured to:
determine a pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based at least partially on a nominal pressure and a dynamic pressure of the cylinder (interpreting nominal as of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual: approximate and interpreting dynamic as marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, hydraulic valves can be set to a setpoint value using a characteristic curve describing a relationship between a pressure and an associated electrical current of the valve and determined based on information from the pressure sensors, and the control unit can control the at least one hydraulic valve so a setpoint pressure prevails at a hydraulic damping element, Paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0030); and
determine a pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based at least partially on the nominal pressure and the dynamic pressure of the cylinder (control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, hydraulic valves can be set to a setpoint value using a characteristic curve describing a relationship between a pressure and an associated electrical current of the valve and determined based on information from the pressure sensors, and the control unit can control the at least one hydraulic valve so a setpoint pressure prevails at a hydraulic damping element, Paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0030).
Fast and Oberheide are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for boom assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the first pressure sensor and the second pressure sensor taught in Oberheide’s system to Fast’s system, to have a first pressure relief assembly further includes a first pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the first pressure relief valve, and a second pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the second pressure relief assembly. Doing so prevents damping systems from operating unreliably in driving conditions such as when the apparatus accelerates or brakes sharply, or cornering (Oberheide, Paragraphs 0005-0006).
However, Fast and Oberheide do not teach wherein the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is chosen along a first pressure curve based at least in part on a position of the piston, wherein the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve is chosen along a second pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the piston, and wherein the first pressure curve is varied from the second pressure curve.
Gross Prues teaches wherein the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is chosen along a first pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the cylinder (output signal for the valve opening for setting the hydraulic pressure at hydraulic cylinder 10a can be generated based on a characteristic curve and a position of the piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder, which can be used to determine a conversion for the valve flow required for folding and unfolding or for retracting and extending the cylinder, Paragraphs 0063, 0069), wherein the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve is chosen along a second pressure curve based at least in part on the position of the cylinder (output signal for the valve opening for setting the hydraulic pressure at hydraulic cylinder 10b can be generated based on a characteristic curve and a position of the piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder, which can be used to determine a conversion for the valve flow required for folding and unfolding or for retracting and extending the cylinder, Paragraphs 0063, 0069), and wherein the first pressure curve is varied from the second pressure curve (characteristic curves of hydraulic cylinders 10a and 10b may be varied and assigned individually, Paragraph 0069).
Fast, Oberheide, and Grosse Prues are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for boom assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the computing system taught in Grosse Prues’ system to Fast’s system, as modified by Oberheide, to specify a reliable control and regulating system for an agricultural device, to obtain precise damping of vibrations (Grosse Prues, Paragraph 0011).
Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Grosse Prues, discloses all aspects of the claimed invention except for adjust the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve based on data from the first pressure sensor, wherein the pressure setpoint is increased along the first pressure curve as a distance of the piston increases from a default position; and
adjust the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve based on data from the second pressure sensor, wherein the pressure setpoint is increased along the second pressure curve as the distance of the piston increases from the default position.
Takaharu teaches adjust the pressure setpoint of a pressure relief valve (4, Figs. 1, 4) based on data from a pressure sensor (relief valve 4 is an electromagnetic proportional relief valve where relief pressure is changed based on an external signal, and when the command signal/current is passed through the relief valve 4, the total spring force is adjusted proportionally based on the signal, and the pressure is adjusted proportionally to the total spring force, Paragraphs 0042, 0050), wherein the pressure setpoint is increased along a pressure curve as a distance of the piston increases from a default position (when the command signal/current is passed through the relief valve 4, the total spring force is adjusted proportionally based on the signal, which adjusts the displacement of the valve from an initial position and causes the pressure to adjust proportionally to the total spring force, and as displacement increases, the pressure increases, Paragraph 0050).
Fast, Oberheide, Gross Prues, and Takaharu are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fluid valve systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the relief valve taught in Takaharu’s system to Fast’s first pressure relief valve and second pressure relief valve, as modified by Oberheide and Gross Prues above, to improve the stability of the discharge pressure by controlling the relief valve (Takaharu, Paragraphs 0006-0010).
With respect to claim 28, Fast, as modified by Oberheide, Gross Prues, and Takaharu, discloses the system of claim 26. Oberheide further teaches wherein the dynamic pressure is based on a look-up table that maps a reactive pressure change for the cylinder in response to actuation of one or more additional cylinders positioned along the boom assembly (pressure can be determined and electronically controlled using a characteristic curve that describes the relationship between pressure and the associated electrical current at the valve, and damping assembly can be controlled by the regulating device to control the hydraulic valves to a setpoint pressure to account for a plurality of hydraulic damping elements so that the setpoint pressure prevails at the respective hydraulic damping elements, Paragraphs 0023, 0030).
Regarding claim 29, Fast, as modified by Oberheide, Gross Prues, and Takaharu, discloses the system of claim 26. Oberheide further teaches the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve is based at least partially on an overrunning pressure that is configured to resist an overrunning load in the cylinder (when a control signal is applied, the spring load in the valve is counteracted electromagnetically and pressure can be maintained according to the control characteristic of the valve, and desired control characteristics can be stored in the control unit for calculating and outputting control signals matching individual setpoint pressure values, Paragraph 0020).
In regards to claim 31, Fast, as modified by Oberheide, Gross Prues, and Takaharu, discloses the system of claim 26. Oberheide further teaches the pressure setpoint of the first pressure relief valve and the pressure setpoint of the second pressure relief valve are each established based on a stress/strain curve for the boom assembly (control unit can calculate and output control signals matching individual setpoint pressure value based on any desired control characteristics, which may be based on a stress/strain curve for the boom assembly, Paragraph 0020).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 7-10, and 21-31 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anna T Ho whose telephone number is (571)272-2587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, First Friday of Pay Period off.
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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/ANNA THI HO/Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/STEVEN M CERNOCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights