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 .
This Office action is in response to the request for continued examination filed on 11/10/2025, in which claims 1-9 are currently pending and addressed below.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/10/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections:
Applicant argues on page 8 of the remarks that “Amano and Hyodo, individually or in combination, each fail to disclose or remotely suggest the features of amended claim 1.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees that Amano fails to disclose the “the controller performs a control of a second flow rate of the second hydraulic pump by calculating angular acceleration based on the angular velocity signal per unit time, calculating a reference slewing-operation speed based on the calculated angular acceleration, and comparing the calculated reference slewing-operation speed with a slewing-operation speed based on operation of the operating-machine” limitation as recited in amended claim 1. Amano discloses a target flow rate is determined based on multiple factors including target velocity and target torque (Amano [0151], [0158]). Angular velocity and angular acceleration can be measured using posture sensors (Amano [0040]). However, angular acceleration can also be calculated based on swing angle and swing velocity of the swing structure (Amano [0085]). Amano discloses target velocities can be determined using the calculated angular acceleration, which is involved in determining the demanded torque (Amano [0142], [0073]-[0074]). Under broadest reasonable interpretation, a reference slewing-operation speed includes a target angular velocity. Amano also discloses a deviation computing section that computes deviations between the target angular velocity and actual angular velocity (Amano [0077]). Therefore, Amano discloses the limitation “the controller performs a control of a second flow rate of the second hydraulic pump by calculating angular acceleration based on the angular velocity signal per unit time, calculating a reference slewing-operation speed based on the calculated angular acceleration, and comparing the calculated reference slewing-operation speed with a slewing-operation speed based on operation of the operating-machine” as recited in claim 1.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and have been found not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the additional amended limitations of claim 1 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.
Claim Interpretation
The terms “slewing” and “slewing-operation” are being interpreted based on the dictionary definition at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application1. Therefore, “slewing” and “slewing-operation” are interpreted as any turning or rotating. Furthermore, “slewing-operation speed” is being interpreted as a speed or velocity related to the turning or rotating operation, such as an angular velocity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0287763 A1 (hereinafter Amano), in view of Young et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0087793 A1 (hereinafter Young).
Regarding claim 1, Amano teaches a working vehicle (Amano Fig. 1) comprising:
a first hydraulic pump; a hydraulic motor for a traveling-machine driven by pressure oil fed from the first hydraulic pump (see at least Amano [0042]: “The hydraulic system 30 includes the hydraulic pump 31 that is driven by the prime mover 32 such as an electric motor or an engine, and delivers the hydraulic fluid”);
the traveling-machine provided with the hydraulic motor (see at least Amano [0035]: “The track device 11 is configured to perform a travelling operation by a travelling hydraulic motor 12 as a hydraulic actuator.”);
a second hydraulic pump (see at least Amano [0042]: “However, the following discussion similarly holds also in cases of configurations including two or more hydraulic pumps.”);
a hydraulic motor for a slewing-machine driven by pressure oil fed from the second hydraulic pump; the slewing-machine provided with the hydraulic motor (see at least Amano [0034]: “The upper swing structure 2 is constituted as a driven body that is made to perform a swing operation with respect to the lower track structure 1 by a swing hydraulic motor 5 (including a velocity reduction mechanism and the like) as a hydraulic actuator driven by the supply and discharge of hydraulic fluid.”; [0042]: “However, the following discussion similarly holds also in cases of configurations including two or more hydraulic pumps.”);
a lower body provided with the traveling-machine (see at least Amano [0035]: “The lower track structure 1 has a crawler type track device 11 on both a left side and a right side (only one side is illustrated). The track device 11 is configured to perform a travelling operation by a travelling hydraulic motor 12 as a hydraulic actuator.”);
an upper body slewably disposed on the lower body (see at least Amano [0034]: “The upper swing structure 2 is constituted as a driven body that is made to perform a swing operation with respect to the lower track structure 1 by a swing hydraulic motor 5 (including a velocity reduction mechanism and the like) as a hydraulic actuator driven by the supply and discharge of hydraulic fluid.”);
a working-machine attached to the upper body (see at least Amano [0037]: “The front work device 3 is, for example, an articulated work device constituted by coupling a plurality of driven bodies to each other rotatably in a vertical direction. The plurality of driven bodies are constituted by, for example, a boom 17, an arm 18, and a bucket 19 as a work tool. The boom 17 has a proximal end portion thereof rotatably coupled to a front portion of the swing frame 13 of the upper swing structure 2 via a joint portion (not illustrated).”);
a cab disposed in the upper body (see at least Amano [0036]: “The upper swing structure 2 includes a swing frame 13 as a supporting structural body, a cab 14 installed on a front side of the swing frame 13, and a machine room 15 provided on a rear side of the cab 14.”);
an operating-machine provided in the cab (see at least Amano [0036]: “Arranged in the cab 14 are an operation device 6 to be described later and used for operating the hydraulic excavator, a revolution speed dial 7 (see FIG. 2 to be described later for both), and the like.”);
an inertial sensor provided in the upper body (see at least Amano [0038]: “The second posture sensor 25 is constituted by, for example, an inertial measurement device (Inertial Measurement Unit: IMU). The second posture sensor 25 can measure an angular velocity and an acceleration as physical quantities (operation information) related to the operation of the upper swing structure 2.”);
and a controller, wherein the controller includes the inertial sensor that output an acceleration signal corresponding to travel acceleration of a full body and output an angular velocity signal corresponding to an axis of a swivel center shaft in the slewing-machine (see at least Amano [0038]: “The second posture sensor 25 is constituted by, for example, an inertial measurement device (Inertial Measurement Unit: IMU). The second posture sensor 25 can measure an angular velocity and an acceleration as physical quantities (operation information) related to the operation of the upper swing structure 2. The first posture sensor 24 and the second posture sensor 25 each output a sensing signal corresponding to a sensed value to a controller 80 (see FIG. 2 to be described later) to be described later.”; [0034]: “In FIG. 1, the hydraulic excavator generally includes a self-propellable lower track structure 1; an upper swing structure 2 swingably mounted on the lower track structure 1; and a front work device 3 provided to a front portion of the upper swing structure 2 in such a manner as to be rotatable (raisable and lowerable) in an upward-downward direction. The upper swing structure 2 is constituted as a driven body that is made to perform a swing operation with respect to the lower track structure 1 by a swing hydraulic motor 5 (including a velocity reduction mechanism and the like) as a hydraulic actuator driven by the supply and discharge of hydraulic fluid.”),
and the controller performs a control of a second flow rate of the second hydraulic pump by calculating angular acceleration based on the angular velocity signal per unit time, calculating a reference slewing-operation speed based on the calculated angular acceleration (see at least Amano [0151]: “Specifically, the controller 80A illustrated in FIG. 16 has a target flow rate computing section 101 in addition to functional sections of the target velocity computing section 91, a target thrust and torque computing section 92A, a target pressure computing section 93A, an actual pressure computing section 94A, a pump displacement command computing section 95A, a meter-in control valve command computing section 96A, a directional control valve command computing section 97A, and the bleed-off valve command computing section 98…However, the target velocity computing section 91 outputs the target velocities Vt and ωt of the hydraulic actuators 20, 21, and 5 as a computation result to the target pressure computing section 93A and the target flow rate computing section 101.”; [0158]: “As illustrated in FIG. 16, the target flow rate computing section 101 computes target flow rates Qt of the hydraulic actuators 20, 21, and 5 on the basis of the target velocities Vt and ωt of the hydraulic actuators 20, 21, and 5 as a computation result of the target velocity computing section 91.”; [0085]: “That is, the demanded torque computing section 924 computes demanded torque τ demanded to achieve a driving state in which a target angular acceleration as a computation result of the target angular acceleration computing section 923 can be achieved by the upper swing structure 2, on the basis of an actual swing angle (actual angle) and an actual swing velocity (actual angular velocity) of the upper swing structure 2 as the sensed values obtained by the posture sensor 24.” Amano [0073]-[0074] teaches computing target angular accelerations based on target angular velocities and actual angular velocities to determine the demanded torque; under broadest reasonable interpretation slewing-operation speed per unit time includes angular velocity),
and comparing the calculated reference slewing-operation speed with a slewing-operation speed based on operation of the operating-machine (see at least Amano [0077]: “The deviation computing section 925 computes deviations between the target angular velocities output from the rate limiting section 922 and the actual angular velocities of the joint portions 18 a and 19 a (the boom 17, the arm 18, and the bucket 19) of the front work device 3 as the sensed values obtained by the posture sensors 25 to 28.”).
Amano fails to expressly disclose controlling a flow rate by comparing an actual traveling-operation speed with acceleration calculated based on the acceleration signal. However, Young teaches
the controller performs a control of a first flow rate of the first hydraulic pump by calculating the travel acceleration based on the acceleration signal, calculating a reference traveling-operation speed based on the calculated travel acceleration, and comparing the calculated reference traveling-operation speed with a traveling-operation speed based on operation of the operating-machine (see at least Young [0067]: “As another example, the controller 304 can determine a target flow rate (or cycle time) based on actual travel speed or acceleration of a power machine, such as may be identified based on signals from one or more of the sensors 318. As discussed above, for example, if the power machine is traveling with a particular (e.g., elevated) speed or acceleration, it may help to preserve optimal machine stability and effectiveness if the cycle time of a work element or other system does not fall below a target minimum value (e.g., if the work element or other system does not travel too fast).”; [0068]: “Similarly, in some embodiments, the controller 304 can determine a target flow rate based on a commanded travel speed of the power machine. For example, an orientation of a throttle control or other device of the operator interface 342 can indicate a commanded travel speed and the controller 304 (or another control system) can control traction elements of the power machine accordingly. Correspondingly, the controller 304 can increase or decrease displacement of the pump 324, depending on whether a decrease or increase of travel speed has been commanded, also to help ensure optimally stable run-time operation.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system taught by Amano with the flow rate taught by Young with reasonable expectation of success. Young is directed towards the related field of operating hydraulic power machines. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine Amano with Young to effectively manage flow rates (see at least Young [0021]: “Embodiments of the disclosure can provide improvements over conventional hydraulic systems, including to address the issues noted above, by providing hydraulic systems (and corresponding methods) that control the cycle time of work elements such as lift arms and that otherwise effectively manage flow rates for hydraulic circuits.”).
Regarding claim 4, Amano in combination with Young teach all elements of the working vehicle according to claim 1 as explained above. Amano further teaches
wherein a drive source of the first hydraulic pump and the second hydraulic pump is an engine (see at least Amano [0042]: “The hydraulic system 30 includes the hydraulic pump 31 that is driven by the prime mover 32 such as an electric motor or an engine, and delivers the hydraulic fluid”; [0042]: “However, the following discussion similarly holds also in cases of configurations including two or more hydraulic pumps.”)
Young further teaches
and the first hydraulic pump and the second hydraulic pump are respectively a variable displacement type swashplate pump (This limitation is taught through the combination of Amano and Young. Amano teaches a first and second hydraulic pump (Amano [0042]). Amano fails to expressly disclose the hydraulic pumps as variable displacement type swashplate pumps. However, Young teaches a variable displacement type swashplate pump (Young [0053]: “Generally, the hydraulic flow rate can be changed by changing the rotational speed at the input shaft or by changing the displacement of the hydraulic pump 324, such as, for example, by adjusting an angular orientation of a swash plate (not shown) of the hydraulic pump 324 relative to the input shaft.”). Therefore, the combination of Amano and Young teach the entirety of this limitation).
Claims 2-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano in view of Young, and further in view of Hyodo et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0355657 A1 (hereinafter Hyodo).
Regarding claim 2, Amano in combination with Young teach all elements of the working vehicle according to claim 1 as explained above. Amano further teaches
and wherein the controller performs the control of the second hydraulic pump to discharge the second flow rate (see at least Amano [0048]: “The meter-in control valves 34, 36, and 38 control flow rates of the hydraulic fluid supplied from the hydraulic pump 31 to the corresponding hydraulic actuators 20, 21, and 5 (which may hereinafter be referred to as meter-in flow rates).”),
and calculates required flow rate for the upper body to perform actual slewing-operation based on the angular acceleration and a reference slewing-operation speed per unit time obtained by backward calculation from the second flow rate (see at least Amano [0174]: “The target flow rate summing section 958 computes a demanded flow rate of the hydraulic pump 31 by summing all of the meter-in target flow rates Qit of the respective hydraulic actuators 20, 21, and 5 as a computation result of the target flow rate computing section 101. The feedback computing section 954A computes a feedback correction value of the target flow rate of the hydraulic pump 31 according to feedback control, on the basis of the pressure deviation of the hydraulic pump 31 (deviation between the target delivery pressure and the actual delivery pressure of the hydraulic pump 31) output from the deviation computing section 953.”; [0085]: “That is, the demanded torque computing section 924 computes demanded torque τ demanded to achieve a driving state in which a target angular acceleration as a computation result of the target angular acceleration computing section 923 can be achieved by the upper swing structure 2, on the basis of an actual swing angle (actual angle) and an actual swing velocity (actual angular velocity) of the upper swing structure 2 as the sensed values obtained by the posture sensor 24.”; [0078]: “The feedback computing section 926 computes feedback correction values of target torque according to feedback control such as PI (Proportional Integral) control or PID (Proportional-Integral-Derivative) control, on the basis of the angular velocity deviations as a computation result of the deviation computing section 925.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation reference slewing-operation speed per unit time includes a target angular velocity, which is used to determine angular velocity deviations; under broadest reasonable interpretation a backward calculation includes feedback control)
Amano in view of Young fail to expressly disclose calculating required flow rate for the full body to perform actual traveling-operation based on the acceleration and a reference traveling-operation speed per unit time obtained by backward calculation from the first flow rate. However, Hyodo teaches
wherein the controller performs the control of the first hydraulic pump to discharge the first flow rate (see at least Hyodo [0052]: “Accordingly, the discharge flow rate of the HST pump 41 increases with the increase in the rotational speed of the engine 3; thus, the flow rate of the pressure oil flowing into the HST motor 42 from the HST pump 41 increases.”),
and calculates required flow rate for the full body to perform actual traveling-operation based on the acceleration and a reference traveling-operation speed per unit time obtained by backward calculation from the first flow rate (see at least Hyodo [0051]-[0053]: “As illustrated in FIG. 6(c), the discharge flow rate of the HST pump 41 is proportional to the square of the rotational speed of the engine 3 from V1 to V2 of the engine rotational speed. At the engine rotational speed of V2 or more, the discharge flow rate of the HST pump 41 is linearly proportional to the rotational speed of the engine 3, and the discharge flow rate increases as the rotational speed of the engine 3 increases…Thus, in the HST travel drive system, the discharge flow rate of the HST pump 41 is continuously increased and decreased to adjust the vehicle speed (shift gears).”; [0046]: “Specifically, a depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 detected by a depression amount sensor 610 is input to the controller 5, and the target engine rotational speed is output from the controller 5 to the engine 3 as the command signal. The engine 3 has the rotational speed controlled in accordance with this target engine rotational speed.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation a reference traveling-operation speed per unit time includes a requested target engine rotational speed; under broadest reasonable interpretation a backward calculation includes continuously adjusting the flow rate to obtain the vehicle speed),
and the controller calculates in a case where the controller compares the actual traveling-operation speed per the unit time with the reference traveling-operation speed to determine that the actual traveling-operation speed per the unit time is greater than the reference traveling-operation speed (see at least Hyodo [0047]: “As illustrated in FIG. 5, the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 is proportional to the target engine rotational speed; thus, the target engine rotational speed increases as the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 increases. In FIG. 5, in a range of 0% to 20 or 30% in the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61, the target engine rotational speed is constant at a minimum target engine rotational speed Vmin regardless of the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 (dead band).”; Hyodo teaches the actual traveling-operation speed per the unit time is greater than the reference traveling-operation speed during dead band because the actual engine rotational speed operates at Vmin, regardless of the speed being greater than the amount requested by the operator through depression of the accelerator pedal),
and the controller calculates in a case where the controller compares the actual slewing-operation speed per the unit time with the reference traveling-operation speed to determine that the actual traveling-operation speed per the unit time is greater than the reference traveling-operation speed (see at least Hyodo [0064]: “In FIG. 8, in a range of 0 to 20% of the raising operation amount of the lift arm 21, the spool does not open and the opening area is 0% (dead band).”; [0083]: “Step S503, that is, when the lift arm 21 is determined to be during the raising movement (Step S503/YES), the data obtaining section 51 obtains the speed stage signal from the speed stage switch 63 (Step S504).”; [0047]: “As illustrated in FIG. 5, the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 is proportional to the target engine rotational speed; thus, the target engine rotational speed increases as the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 increases. In FIG. 5, in a range of 0% to 20 or 30% in the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61, the target engine rotational speed is constant at a minimum target engine rotational speed Vmin regardless of the depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 (dead band).”; Hyodo [0030]-[0031] teaches the lift arm speed is a slewing-operation speed because the lift arm can be turned; Hyodo teaches comparing the actual slewing-operation speed per the unit time with the reference traveling-operation speed because the lift arm operation can indicate the speed stage and whether the vehicle is operating in dead band).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system taught by Amano in view of Young with Hyodo with reasonable expectation of success. Hyodo is directed towards the related field of a wheel loader with a continuously variable travel drive system. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine Amano in view of Young with Hyodo to reduce a sudden change in vehicle speed (see at least Hyodo [0008]: “Therefore, it is an object of the present invention to provide a wheel loader configured to reduce a sudden change in vehicle speed caused by an erroneous determination of a raising operation of a lift arm.”).
Regarding claim 3, Amano in combination with Young and Hyodo teach all elements of the working vehicle according to claim 2 as explained above. Amano further teaches
and the controller performs the control of the second hydraulic pump to discharge the second flow rate according to the slewing-operation speed (see at least Amano [0158]: “As illustrated in FIG. 16, the target flow rate computing section 101 computes target flow rates Qt of the hydraulic actuators 20, 21, and 5 on the basis of the target velocities Vt and ωt of the hydraulic actuators 20, 21, and 5 as a computation result of the target velocity computing section 91.”),
in a case where the controller compares the slewing-operation speed per the unit time with the reference slewing-operation speed to determine that the slewing-operation speed per the unit time is equal to or smaller than the reference slewing-operation speed (see at least Amano [0085]: “That is, the demanded torque computing section 924 computes demanded torque τ demanded to achieve a driving state in which a target angular acceleration as a computation result of the target angular acceleration computing section 923 can be achieved by the upper swing structure 2, on the basis of an actual swing angle (actual angle) and an actual swing velocity (actual angular velocity) of the upper swing structure 2 as the sensed values obtained by the posture sensor 24.”; Amano [0077]-[0078] teaches determining deviations of angular velocity and determining feedback correction values; Amano [0081] teaches the adding section can add the feedback correction values to achieve the target torque, which results in the target angular velocity; therefore, Amano teaches the slewing-operation speed per unit time (actual swing velocity) can be equal to or smaller than the reference slewing-operation speed (target angular velocity))
Hyodo further teaches
wherein the controller performs the control of the first hydraulic pump to discharge the first flow rate according to the actual traveling-operation speed (see at least Hyodo [0052]: “Accordingly, the discharge flow rate of the HST pump 41 increases with the increase in the rotational speed of the engine 3; thus, the flow rate of the pressure oil flowing into the HST motor 42 from the HST pump 41 increases.”),
in a case where the controller compares the actual traveling-operation speed per the unit time with the reference traveling-operation speed to determine that the actual traveling-operation speed per the unit time is equal to or smaller than the reference traveling-operation speed (see at least [0046]: “Specifically, a depression amount of the accelerator pedal 61 detected by a depression amount sensor 610 is input to the controller 5, and the target engine rotational speed is output from the controller 5 to the engine 3 as the command signal. The engine 3 has the rotational speed controlled in accordance with this target engine rotational speed.”).
Regarding claim 5, this claim recites an system similar to the system of claim 4 as explained above, with a dependency on claim 2. Therefore, claim 5 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 4.
Regarding claim 6, this claim recites an system similar to the system of claim 4 as explained above, with a dependency on claim 3. Therefore, claim 6 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 4.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano in view of Young, and further in view of Fukuda et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0263393 A1 (hereinafter Fukuda).
Regarding claim 7, Amano in combination with Young teach all elements of the working vehicle according to claim 1 as explained above. Amano further teaches
wherein a drive source of the first hydraulic pump and the second hydraulic pump is an engine (see at least Amano [0042]: “The hydraulic system 30 includes the hydraulic pump 31 that is driven by the prime mover 32 such as an electric motor or an engine, and delivers the hydraulic fluid”; [0042]: “However, the following discussion similarly holds also in cases of configurations including two or more hydraulic pumps.”).
Amano in view of Young fail to expressly disclose the first and second hydraulic pumps as fixed displacement gear pumps. However, Fukuda teaches
and the first hydraulic pump and the second hydraulic pump are respectively a fixed displacement gear pump (see at least Fukuda [0075]: “The first hydraulic pump P1 is a pump configured to be driven by the power of the prime mover 32, and is constituted of a fixed displacement gear pump.”; [0077]: “The second hydraulic pump P2 is a pump configured to be driven by the power of the prime mover 32, and is constituted of a fixed displacement type gear pump.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system taught by Amano in view of Young with the fixed displacement gear pumps taught by Fukuda with reasonable expectation of success. Fukuda is directed towards the related field of traveling control of a working machine. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine Amano in view of Young with Fukuda to control operation of the vehicle and actuators (see at least Fukuda [0075]-[0078]: “The first hydraulic pump P1 is configured to output the operation fluid stored in the tank 22. In particular, the first hydraulic pump P1 outputs the operation fluid mainly used for the controlling…The second hydraulic pump P2 is configured to output the operation fluid stored in the tank 22, and supplies the operation fluid to a fluid tube for the working system, for example. For example, the second hydraulic pump P2 supplies the operation fluid to the boom cylinder 14 configured to operate the boom 10, the bucket cylinder 15 to operate the bucket, and the control valve (a flow rate control valve) configured to control the auxiliary hydraulic actuator that operates the auxiliary hydraulic actuator”).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano in view of Young and Hyodo, and further in view of Fukuda.
Regarding claim 8, this claim recites an system similar to the system of claim 7 as explained above, with a dependency on claim 2. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 7.
Regarding claim 9, this claim recites an system similar to the system of claim 7 as explained above, with a dependency on claim 3. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 7.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yoshihara et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No 2022/0098825 A1, directed towards a turn-driving apparatus for a work machine.
Gehloff, U.S. Patent Application Publication No 2011/0067763 A1, directed towards limiting jerk by changing a flow rate to limit changes in acceleration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J SLOWIK whose telephone number is (571)270-5608. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI: 0900-1700.
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, ANISS CHAD can be reached on (571)270-3832. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ELIZABETH J SLOWIK/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
1 “Slew”, 06 March 2023, Merriam-Webster