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
This office action is in response to the amendments filed March 3, 2026. Claims are 1, 16, and 20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of claim 20 under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation applicant refers to regarding “a first threshold distance” appears to be “a first threshold distance of the retracted position” while the indefiniteness refers to “a second threshold distance of the raised position”. As the claim specifies that the track actuator moves between “an extended position” and “a retracted position” and that the lift actuator moves between “a lowered position” and “a raised position”, under broadest reasonable interpretation, the “raised” and “retracted” positions appear to refer to two different positions such that “a first threshold distance of the retracted position” does not share a common numerical ordering with “a second threshold distance of the raised position”. For at least this reason, examiner maintains the rejection under 35 USC 112(b).
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the amendments claims 1, 16, and 20, applicant states that Buege does not disclose “wherein the controller is configured to vary a speed of at least one of (a) the track actuator between a first speed and a second speed based on the track position data, or (b) the lift actuator between a third speed and a fourth speed based on the grabber position data”. However, examiner points that Buege discloses a controller is in communication with both a track position sensor and a grabber position sensor ([0084]), where the position sensors are explicitly cited towards sensing position data. The reach assembly 800 disclosed by Buege is shown in an extended state in Fig. 13 up to a distance 806, where the distance 806 is monitored ([0062], “to monitor a current degree of extension of inner member 804 …”). Furthermore, for the extension or retraction to occur, there must be a variation of speed between a first and second speeds. Regarding the other case of the amended limitation, Buege also discloses varying a speed of the lift actuator between a third speed and a fourth speed ([0043-0044]) based on the grabber position data ([0084]) appears to be taught by Buege. For at least these reasons, examiner maintains the rejections under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103.
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.
Claims 20 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 20 claims “control the lift actuator to reduce a speed of the grabber in response to a determination that the track is within a second threshold distance of the raised position”. However, examiner indicates that the claim has never indicated “a first threshold distance of the raised position”. Examiner suggests amending the claim to either introduce “a first threshold distance of the raised position” or to reword “a second threshold distance of the raised position” to “a first threshold of the raised position”. For prior art examination, examiner will interpret that “a second threshold distance of the raised position” is “a first threshold distance of the raised position”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-2, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US20220106115A1 (Buege).
Regarding claim 1, Buege discloses a refuse vehicle, comprising:
a chassis;
[0031] of Buege, “As shown in FIG. 1, refuse vehicle 10 includes a chassis, shown as frame 12; a body assembly, shown as body 14, coupled to frame 12 (e.g., at a rear end thereof, etc.); and a cab, shown as cab 16, coupled to frame 12 (e.g., at a front end thereof, etc.).”
a body coupled to the chassis and configured to store a volume of refuse;
[0031] of Buege, “As shown in FIG. 1, refuse vehicle 10 includes a chassis, shown as frame 12; a body assembly, shown as body 14, coupled to frame 12 (e.g., at a rear end thereof, etc.); and a cab, shown as cab 16, coupled to frame 12 (e.g., at a front end thereof, etc.).”
a lift assembly including:
[0033] of Buege, “As shown in FIG. 1, refuse vehicle 10 includes first lift mechanism/system (e.g., a front-loading lift assembly, etc.), shown as lift assembly 100.”
a track coupled to the chassis;
See Fig. 2 of Buege, where track 20 is coupled to the chassis (frame 12) by reach assembly 800.
a track actuator configured to move the track relative to the chassis;
See [0055] and Fig. 13 of Buege. Buege discloses a track actuator ([0029], “reach assembly can include a telescoping member (or multiple telescoping members) that are driven to extend or retract by one or more electric motors.”) configured to move the track (“inner member 804 is configured to translate relative to the outer member 802 to extend or retract reach assembly 800, thereby translating track 20 (and carrier 26 and grabber assembly 42 outwards).”) to the chassis (distance 806).
a track position sensor configured to provide track position data indicating a position of the track relative to the chassis;
[0062] of Buege, “In some embodiments, the controller is also configured to receive sensor signals from the sensor to identify and track a current position of lower portion 902 relative to upper portion 904 (e.g., to monitor a current degree of extension of inner member 804 relative to outer member 802).” See also Fig. 13.
a grabber coupled to the track and configured to engage a refuse container;
See Fig. 3 of Buege, where grabber 46 is shown to be coupled to the track 20 by carrier 26.
a lift actuator configured to move the grabber relative to the track; and
[0033] of Buege, “Lift assembly 100 includes a grabber assembly, a carrier assembly, etc., shown as grabber assembly 42, movably coupled to a track, shown as track 20, and configured to move along an entire length of track 20.”, where electric motors are utilized to lift the assembly along track 20 ([0052]).
a grabber position sensor configured to provide grabber position data indicating a position of the grabber relative to the track; and
[0084] of Buege, “The controller can use the sensor signal to determine a current position of grabber assembly 42 and/or carrier 26 along track 20 (or to determine a current degree of extension of reach assembly 800).”
a controller operatively coupled to the track position sensor and the grabber position sensor and configured to vary a speed of at least one of
(a) the track actuator between a first speed and a second speed based on the track position data, or
(b) the lift actuator between a third speed and a fourth speed based on the grabber position data.
Buege discloses the controller operatively coupled to the track position sensor ([0084], “determine a current degree of extension of reach assembly 800”) and the grabber position sensor ([0084], “determine a current position of grabber assembly 400”) and configured to control at least one of (a) the track actuator or (b) the lift actuator ([0043], “Electric motors 702 can be operated by a controller to lift and dump refuse collection bins (e.g., garbage cans) grasped by grabber assembly 42.”) based on at least one of (a) the grabber position or (b) the track position data ([0062], “In some embodiments, the controller restricts lifting and dumping operations (e.g., restricts operation of electric motors to translate carrier 26 and grabber assembly 42) if lower portion 902 is not aligned with upper portion 904 (e.g., if lower portion 902 is not in the configuration shown in FIG. 18).” ).
Regarding claim 2, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the controller is configured to vary a speed of the lift actuator based on the grabber position data.
[0052] of Buege, “In some embodiments, the brake is activated in response to receiving control signals from a controller. The brakes can be activated to lock carrier 26 and grabber assembly 42 at a current position along track 20.”, where the controller is also configured to receive sensor data of the grabber position ([0084]).
Regarding claim 13, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the track includes a straight portion defining a first end position of the grabber and a curved portion defining a second end position of the grabber.
See Fig. 13 of Buege, where the track 20 is broken up into a straight portion as a first end position of the grabber and a curved portion as a second end position of the grabber.
Regarding claim 16, Buege discloses a method of controlling a refuse vehicle including a chassis, a track movably coupled to the chassis, and a grabber movably coupled to the chassis, and a grabber movably coupled to the track and configured to engage a refuse container, comprising:
receiving, from a first sensor, track position data indicating a position of the track relative to the chassis;
[0084] of Buege, “The controller can use the sensor signal to determine a current position of grabber assembly 42 and/or carrier 26 along track 20 (or to determine a current degree of extension of reach assembly 800).”
receiving, from a second sensor, grabber position data indicating a position of the grabber relative to the track; and
[0084] of Buege, “The controller can use the sensor signal to determine a current position of grabber assembly 42 and/or carrier 26 along track 20 (or to determine a current degree of extension of reach assembly 800).”
varying a speed of at least one of
(a) the track actuator to move the track relative to the chassis between a first speed and a second speed based on the track position data, or
(b) the lift actuator to move the grabber relative to the track between a third speed and a fourth speed based on the grabber position data.
See the citation of claim 1 regarding “a controller operatively coupled to the track position sensor …”.
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 3-12, 14-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20220106115A1 (Buege).
Regarding claim 3, with all of the limitations of claim 2, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the controller is configured to reduce the speed of the lift actuator in response to a determination based on the grabber position data that the grabber has reached a threshold position along the track.
In light of the citation of claim 2, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that a system comprising a controller configured to vary a speed of the lift actuator based on the grabber position data would also be configured to reduce the speed of the lift actuator in response to a determination based on the grabber position data that the grabber has reached a threshold position along the track as continually speeding towards the threshold position without braking would cause structural damage to the track or the grabber assembly as the end of the track is reached.
Regarding claim 4, with all of the limitations of claim 3, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the grabber is movable along the track between a first end position and a second end position, the second end position being above the first end position,
See Figs. 3 and 5 of Buege. A first end position can be seen at the bottom of the straight portion 27 of track 20 while a second end position is shown at the right end of the curved portion 29 of track 20, where a grabber shown in Fig. 3 is movable along the track of Fig. 5 ([0036]).
wherein the controller is configured to reduce the speed of the lift actuator in response to a determination based on the grabber position data that both
(a) the grabber has reached the threshold position along the track and
(b) the grabber is moving toward the second end position.
In light of the rationale of claim 3, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the configured controller is configured to perform the reduction in speed past a threshold position as it moves towards the first or second end positions as there are only two end positions to reach during motion of a lift actuator.
Regarding claim 5, with all of the limitations of claim 2, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the grabber is movable along the track between a first end position and a second end position, the second end position being above the first end position, and
See the citation to the first limitation of claim 4.
wherein the controller is configured to reduce the speed of the lift actuator in response to a determination based on the grabber position data that the grabber is moving toward the second end position.
See the rationale of claim 3.
Regarding claim 6, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the controller is configured to vary a speed of the track actuator based on the track position data.
While Buege does not explicitly disclose varying a speed of the track actuator based on the track position data. Buege discloses receiving sensor signals of the track position data ([0084]) and controlling the electrical components of the system by the use of a controller ([0082]), where brakes exist for the reach assembly 800 ([0061]) to lock or decrease output ([0083]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the controller is configured to vary a speed of the track actuator based on the track position data as speeding without braking close to threshold positions could cause damage to the components when the limit is met by the actuated track.
Regarding claim 7, with all of the limitations of claim 6, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the controller is configured to reduce the speed of the track actuator in response to a determination based on the track position data that the track has reached a threshold position.
In light of the rationale of claim 6, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that a system comprising a controller configured to vary a speed of the track actuator based on the track position data would also be configured to reduce the speed of the track actuator in response to a determination based on the track position data that the track has reached a threshold position along the reachable distance as speeding without braking close to threshold positions could cause damage to components when the limit is met.
Regarding claim 8, with all of the limitations of claim 7, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the track is movable between an extended position and a retracted position,
[0056] of Buege, “For example, track 20 can be a distance 806 from outer member 802. When reach assembly 800 is fully retracted, distance 806 is substantially equal to zero (e.g., inner member 804 is fully received therewithin outer member 802). Inner member 804 can translate relative to outer member 802 to increase or decrease distance 806.”
wherein the controller is configured to reduce the speed of the track actuator in response to a determination based on the track position data that both
(a) the track has reached the threshold position and
(b) the track is moving toward the retracted position.
In light of the rationale of claim 7, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the configured controller is configured to perform the reduction in speed past a threshold position as it moves towards the extended or retracted positions as there are only two end positions to reach during motion of the reach assembly 800.
Regarding claim 9, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the track is movable between an extended position and a retracted position, and
See the citation to the first limitation of claim 8.
wherein the controller is configured to reduce a speed of the track actuator in response to a determination based on the track position data that the track is moving toward the retracted position.
See the rationale to the second limitation of claim 8.
Regarding claim 10, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the controller is configured to vary a timing of an operation of the track actuator relative to a timing of an operation of the lift actuator based on the track position data and the grabber position data.
See Fig. 13 and [0062] of Buege. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the controller is configured to vary a timing of an operation of the track actuator relative to a timing of an operation of the lift actuator based on the track position data and the grabber position data as continually speeding towards the threshold position without braking would cause structural damage to the track or the grabber assembly as the end of the track is reached.
Regarding claim 11, with all of the limitations of claim 10, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the grabber is movable along the track between a first end position and a second end position, the second end position being above the first end position,
See citation of first limitation of claim 4.
wherein the track is movable between an extended position and a retracted position,
See citation of first limitation of claim 8.
wherein the controller is configured to vary a timing of the grabber reaching the second end position relative to a timing of the track reaching the retracted position based on the track position data and the grabber position data.
See the rationale of claim 10. Buege discloses that the grabber assembly 42 on the track 20 which would move based on motors ([0052]).
Regarding claim 12, with all of the limitations of claim 11, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the controller is configured to control the lift actuator to bring the grabber to the second end position and control the track actuator to bring the track to the retracted position at substantially the same time.
In light of the rationale of claim 11, one of ordinary skill in the at the time of applicant’s effective filing date would find it obvious to try simultaneously controlling both lift and track actuators as there are a finite number of controls to try (sequentially or simultaneously).
Regarding claim 14, with all of the limitations of claim 13, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the track is movable between an extended position and a retracted position, and
See citation to first limitation of claim 8.
wherein the controller is configured to control the track actuator to move the track into the retracted position while the grabber is passing along the curved portion of the track.
In light of the rationale of claim 10, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that a controller configured to vary a timing of an operation of the track actuator relative to a timing of an operation of the lift actuator based on the track position data and the grabber position data is also configured to control the track actuator to move the track into the retracted position while the grabber is passing along the curved portion of the track as continually speeding on the curved portion of the track without braking could result in damage to the components.
Regarding claim 15, with all of the limitations of claim 14, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein the track actuator is configured to move the track laterally between the extended position and the retracted position,
See citation to first limitation of claim 8.
wherein the curved portion has a transition point at which the curved portion is tangent to a horizontal plane, and See Fig. 5 of Buege, where a curved portion of the track that has a 180 degree turn must have a point that has a horizontal plane tangent to it (approximately on or around point 28).
wherein the controller is configured to control the lift actuator and the track actuator such that the grabber reaches the transition point and the track reaches the retracted position at substantially the same time.
See the rationale of the second limitation of claim 14.
Regarding claim 17, with all of the limitations of claim 16, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
further comprising controlling the track actuator to move the track relative to the chassis based on the grabber position data.
Buege discloses that the grabber position sensor and track position sensor are the same sensor ([0084]). One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the track can be controlled based on the grabber position data.
Regarding claim 18, with all of the limitations of claim 16, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
further comprising controlling the lift actuator to move the grabber relative to the track based on the track position data.
Buege discloses that the grabber position sensor and track position sensor are the same sensor ([0084]). One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the lift can be controlled by the lift actuator ([0052], electric motors 702) based on the track position data.
Regarding claim 19, with all of the limitations of claim 16, the refuse vehicle further comprises:
wherein controlling the track actuator includes reducing a speed of the track relative to the chassis, and
While Buege does not explicitly disclose controlling the track actuator includes reducing a speed of the track relative to the chassis, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that a speed of the track relative to the chassis would be reduced as either end positions are met (i.e., distance 806 is minimized or maximized) by the use of a track actuator ([0055], “The various telescoping members can be driven to extend or retract using an electric motor, a linear electric actuator, gearboxes, etc., thereby providing a fully-electric reach assembly 800.”).
wherein controlling the lift actuator includes reducing a speed of the grabber relative to the track.
While Buege does not explicitly disclose controlling the lift actuator includes reducing a speed of the grabber relative to the track, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that a speed of the grabber relative to the track would be reduced at either end positions, where there is a lift actuator ([0052, electric motors 702) to move between the top end position would (where grabber assembly would hold the refuse container to dump out its contents to the refuse compartment 30) and the bottom position (where grabber assembly 42 would grasp or release the refuse container at rest to its original location).
Regarding claim 20, Buege discloses a refuse vehicle comprising:
a chassis;
See citation of claim 1.
a body coupled to the chassis and configured to store a volume of refuse;
See citation of claim 1.
a lift assembly including:
See citation of claim 1.
a track coupled to the chassis;
See citation of claim 1.
a track actuator configured to move the track relative to the chassis between an extended position and a retracted position;
See citation of claim 1 and Fig. 13 of Buege.
a track position sensor configured to provide track position data indicating a position of the track relative to the chassis;
See citation of claim 1.
a grabber coupled to the track and configured to engage a refuse container;
See citation of claim 1.
a lift actuator configured to move the grabber relative to the track between a lowered position and a raised position; and
See citation of claim 1 and Fig. 5 of Buege.
a grabber position sensor configured to provide grabber position data indicating a position of the grabber relative to the track; and
See citation of claim 1.
a controller operatively coupled to the track position sensor and the grabber position sensor and configured to:
See citation of claim 1.
control the track actuator to reduce a speed of the track from a first speed to a second speed in response to a determination that the track is within a first threshold distance of the retracted position;
See rationale of claim 7.
control the lift actuator to reduce a speed of the grabber from a third speed to a fourth speed in response to a determination that the track is within a second threshold distance of the raised position; and
See rationale of claim 3.
control the track actuator to bring the track to the retracted position and control the lift actuator to bring the grabber to the raised position at substantially the same time.
See rationale of claim 12.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAEWOOK JUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-5470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM..
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, Wade Miles can be reached on (571) 270-7777. 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.
/J.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/WADE MILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights