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 February 11th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7-10, and 21-31 remain pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 30 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 26. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 30 recites the limitation “wherein the second pressure relief assembly further includes a second pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the second pressure relief valve.” There is a lack of clarity for this limitation in the claim. This limitation appears to be a double inclusion of claim 26 and it is unclear whether this limitation is directed to include the same element twice, which is the second pressure sensor previously claimed in claim 26. This renders the claim indefinite. The examiner suggests revising this limitation to rectify the issue.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 30 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 26, and it appears to recite limitations that are duplicate subject matter to claim 26. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fast et al. (US Patent 10,798,865).
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).
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.
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 Takaharu et al. (JP 4368508 B2).
In regards to claim 2, Fast discloses the system of claim 1. However, Fast does not disclose the first pressure relief valve is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the first pressure relief valve, wherein the relief pressure 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 (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 relief pressure 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 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 system, to improve the stability of the discharge pressure by controlling the relief valve (Takaharu, Paragraphs 0006-0010).
In regards to claim 3, Fast discloses the system of claim 1. However, Fast does not disclose the second pressure relief valve is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the second pressure relief valve, wherein the relief pressure 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 (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 relief pressure 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 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 system, 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 Raymond (US Patent 4,055,197).
With respect to claim 4, Fast discloses the system of claim 1. However, Fast does not disclose 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 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, to provide a system with improved reliability, stability, high regulation accuracy, and a wide pressure range (Raymond, Col. 1, Ln. 63-67).
Claims 5, 7-10, and 21-25 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).
In regards to claim 5, Fast 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). However, Fast does not disclose a computing system as claimed. Oberheide teaches a system (10, Figs. 1a-1c) comprising:
a computing system (“control unit”, Paragraph 0030) communicatively coupled to the cylinder (14, control unit actuates at least one hydraulic valve based on sensor values, and respective hydraulic valves can be associated with first and second hydraulic actuating devices 14 and 15, which can be configured as hydraulic cylinders, Fig. 2, Paragraphs 0030, 0037, 0039, 0046), 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), 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).
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).
With respect to claim 7, Fast, as modified by 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 (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 discloses the system of claim 1. 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 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 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 Oberheide, discloses the system of claim 5. 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 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 cylinder, 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 cylinder (14, control unit actuates at least one hydraulic valve based on sensor values, and respective hydraulic valves can be associated with first and second hydraulic actuating devices 14 and 15, which can be configured as hydraulic cylinders, Fig. 2, Paragraphs 0030, 0037, 0039, 0046), 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).
Regarding claim 22, Fast, as modified by Oberheide, 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, 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 discloses the system of claim 1. 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, 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).
Claims 26-31 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) 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);
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, and a second pressure sensor fluidly coupled between the cylinder and the second pressure relief assembly.
Oberheide teaches a system (10, Figs. 1a-1c) comprising 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).
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).
Fast, as modified by Oberheide, discloses all aspects of the claimed invention except for wherein the first pressure relief valve is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the first pressure relief valve based on data from the first pressure sensor, and wherein the relief pressure is increased as a distance of the piston increases from a default position, and wherein the second pressure relief valve is electronically-controlled to adjust a relief pressure associated with the second pressure relief valve based on data from the second pressure sensor, and wherein the relief pressure is increased as the distance of the piston increases from the 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 (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 relief pressure 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, 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 system, as modified by Takaharu above, to improve the stability of the discharge pressure by controlling the relief valve (Takaharu, Paragraphs 0006-0010). The first pressure relief valve and the second pressure relief valve disclosed in Fast would be each combined to have to the features of the relief valve taught in Takaharu.
In regards to claim 27, Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Takaharu, discloses the system of claim 27. Oberheide further teaches a computing system (“control unit”, Paragraph 0030) communicatively coupled to the cylinder (14, control unit actuates at least one hydraulic valve based on sensor values, and respective hydraulic valves can be associated with first and second hydraulic actuating devices 14 and 15, which can be configured as hydraulic cylinders, Fig. 2, Paragraphs 0030, 0037, 0039, 0046), 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).
With respect to claim 28, Fast, as modified by Oberheide and Takaharu, discloses the system of claim 27. 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 and Takaharu, discloses the system of claim 27. 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 and Takaharu, discloses the system of claim 27. 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
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Oberheide provides a motivation to combine the taught features to Fast because 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). Additionally, Takaharu provides the motivation to combine the taught features to Fast, as modified by Oberheide, because doing so ensures stability of the discharge pressure by controlling the relief valve (Takaharu, Paragraphs 0006-0010).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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
/JOSEPH A GREENLUND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752