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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 11/04/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) of the claims under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Examiner agrees it would not be obvious to modify the prior art currently of record given its function to be manual operated. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Endoh, European Patent Publication EP 0227547 A2 which discloses a transmission system featuring the same structure and for the same function although called differently and as such would be obvious to modify with a manual control.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endoh, European Patent Publication EP 0227547 A2 (hereinafter “Endoh”) in view of Reed, U.S. Patent 4,767,162 (hereinafter “Reed”) and in further view of Mienko et al., U.S. Patent Publication 4,788,821 (hereinafter “Mienko”).
In Reference to Claim 1:
Endoh discloses a hydraulic implement for attachment to a hydraulic system (Figure 2) having a pressure line (14-1) and a return line (14-2), where the hydraulic implement includes: a motor (10) operably connected between the pressure line and the return line and to rotate a shaft (shown in Figure 2) when hydraulic fluid flows from the pressure line through the motor (10) to the return line; a ramping circuit configured to enable the motor to ramp up to operating speed and to coast to a stop, the ramping circuit including an anti-cavitation valve (20) connected in parallel across the motor between the pressure line and the return line, wherein the anti-cavitation valve is configured to allow hydraulic fluid flow from the return line to the pressure line when pressure within the return line is over a threshold above pressure within the pressure line; and an adjustable flow control valve (32) connected in parallel across the motor between the pressure line and the return line, wherein the adjustable flow control valve is configured to be adjusted into a fully closed position, various partially-opened positions, and a fully open position (See, Endoh: “ With the above construction of the second embodi-ment, in an idling state, in which the prime mover 4 is driven, the first to third constant discharge rate pumps 30-1 to 30-3 discharge the pressurized fluid only slightly, and the first variable throttle valve 32 and first and second change-over valves 40-1 and 40-2 are held in an open state.At the time of low speed, only the first constant discharge rate pump 30-1 is operated, and the first variable throttle valve 32 is controlled to the closed position side“).
Endoh fails to explicitly disclose the newly amended limitation of an operator controlled ramping circuit configured to enable an operator to ramp up the motor to operating speed and to ramp down the motor wherein the circuit includes an operator- controlled adjustable flow control valve manually adjusted via a control knob by the operator.
However, in the same field of endeavor hydraulic circuits, Reed discloses a hydraulic circuit wherein the flow control valve is adjustable by an operator. See, Figure 2, flow control valve 17 which is user operated by a handle and knob.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Endoh with the teachings of Reed because such a modification is a simple substitution of one known method of operating a variable thorttle valve, for another, manual operator-controlled variable throttle valve, providing the same predictable results of adjusting the flow control of the circuit.
Endoh as modified fails to explicitly disclose the newly amended limitation of a quick coupler for connection of the hydraulic implement to the hydraulic system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, hydraulic circuits with flow control regulation, Mienko teaches the use of quick couplers between a connection of the hydraulic implement and the hydraulic system.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to further modify Endoh to include quick couplers as taught be Mienko because such a modification allows for several advantages, improved ability to provide maintenance and repair on the hydraulic system, improved manufacture and construction, and improved ability to utilize the hydraulic circuit for different hydraulic implements by simply quick connecting the hydraulic conduits to various implements.
In Reference to Claim 12:
Endoh discloses a method for operating a hydraulic implement that is attached to a hydraulic system (Figure 2) having a pressure line (14-1) and a return line (14-2), wherein the hydraulic implement includes a motor (10) operably connected between the pressure line and the return line and to operate to rotate a shaft (shown in Figure 2) when hydraulic fluid flows from the pressure line through the motor to the return line, and further includes a ramping circuit configured to enable the motor to ramp up to operating speed and to coast to a stop, the ramping circuit including an anti-cavitation valve (20) connected in parallel across the motor (10) between the pressure line (14-1) and the return line (14-2), and an adjustable flow control valve (32) connected in parallel across the motor between the pressure line and the return line, wherein the anti-cavitation valve (20) is configured to allow hydraulic fluid flow from the return line to the pressure line when pressure within the return line is over a threshold above pressure within the pressure line, and the adjustable flow control valve (32) is configured to be adjusted into a fully closed position, various partially-opened positions, and a fully open position, wherein the method comprises: engaging the hydraulic system to cause fluid to flow from the pressure line through an open adjustable flow control valve to the return line; and at least partially closing the adjustable flow control valve to divert at least some hydraulic fluid flow from the pressure line through the motor to the return line (See, Endoh: “ With the above construction of the second embodi-ment, in an idling state, in which the prime mover 4 is driven, the first to third constant discharge rate pumps 30-1 to 30-3 discharge the pressurized fluid only slightly, and the first variable throttle valve 32 and first and second change-over valves 40-1 and 40-2 are held in an open state.At the time of low speed, only the first constant discharge rate pump 30-1 is operated, and the first variable throttle valve 32 is controlled to the closed position side“).
Endoh fails to explicitly disclose the newly amended limitation of an operator controlled ramping circuit configured to enable an operator to ramp up the motor to operating speed and to ramp down the motor wherein the circuit includes an operator- controlled adjustable flow control valve manually adjusted via a control knob by the operator.
However, in the same field of endeavor hydraulic circuits, Reed discloses a hydraulic circuit wherein the flow control valve is adjustable by an operator. See, Figure 2, flow control valve 17 which is user operated by a handle and knob.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Endoh with the teachings of Reed because such a modification is a simple substitution of one known method of operating a variable thorttle valve, for another, manual operator-controlled variable throttle valve, providing the same predictable results of adjusting the flow control of the circuit.
Endoh as modified fails to explicitly disclose the newly amended limitation of a quick coupler for connection of the hydraulic implement to the hydraulic system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, hydraulic circuits with flow control regulation, Mienko teaches the use of quick couplers between a connection of the hydraulic implement and the hydraulic system.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to further modify Endoh to include quick couplers as taught be Mienko because such a modification allows for several advantages, improved ability to provide maintenance and repair on the hydraulic system, improved manufacture and construction, and improved ability to utilize the hydraulic circuit for different hydraulic implements by simply quick connecting the hydraulic conduits to various implements.
In Reference to Claim 13:
Endoh further discloses at least partially closing the adjust control valve (32), fully closing the adjustable flow control valve to divert all fluid flow from the pressure line through the motor to the return line. See, Figure 2 which illustrates that the throttle is of variable throttle type and therefore would be adjustable to divert fluid.
In Reference to Claim 14:
Endoh further discloses stopping the motor from rotating by reopening the adjustable flow control valve to cause fluid to bypass the motor flowing from the pressure line to the return line, wherein fluid flows from the return line through the anti- cavitation valve to the pressure line when the motor coasts to a stop after the adjustable flow control valve is opened. See, Figure 2. See also Endoh: “ in an idling state, in which the prime mover 4 is driven, the first to third constant discharge rate pumps 30-1 to 30-3 discharge the pressurized fluid only slightly, and the first variable throttle valve 32 and first and second change-over valves 40-1 and 40-2 are held in an open state.” This when they want the motor despite having a slight pressurized amount of fluid (to improve responsiveness) the fluid is bypassed from the motor due to the opening of valve 32.
Claim(s) 3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endoh, European Patent Publication EP 0227547 A2 (hereinafter “Endoh”) in view of Reed, U.S. Patent 4,767,162 (hereinafter “Reed”) in further view of Mienko et al., U.S. Patent Publication 4,788,821 (hereinafter “Mienko”) and in view of Guhr et al., U.S. Patent 7,415,748 (hereinafter “Guhr”).
In Reference to Claim 3:
Endoh as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 1, but fails to disclose a quick attachment plate for connection to a machine that includes the hydraulic system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, work machines with hydraulic circuits for powering a hydraulic implement, Guhr discloses a quick attachment plate for connection to a machine that includes the hydraulic system (See, mounting saddle 102 having a connection plate 125t sized and shaped to receive said mounting plate 58 for a skid steer vehicle 40; Also See, Column 12 lines 4-12 which support.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Endoh such that it include the teachings of Guhr, specifically to have the hydraulic system and implement be in a configuration that allows for a quick attachment (as taught by Guhr) because allows for quicker manufacture and maintenance.
In Reference to Claim 5:
Endoh as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 1, but fails to disclose a blower, wherein the motor is operably connected to the blower.
However, in the same field of endeavor, hydraulic work machines, Guhr discloses a hydraulic circuit featuring a blower (when implement is to be used in reverse mode from vacuuming, blower mode, a hose 644 is to be coupled to the connector 640 to provide a centralized blowing force through the hose; Figure 12D, column 12, lines 31-34) wherein the motor is operably connected to the blower (hydraulic motor 108 drives vacuum pump 230: Figure 10, column 10 lines 26-51).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Enodh such that the hydraulic circuit of Endoh drive a blower (as taught by Guhr) instead of a wheels (as recited in Endoh) because placing the drive circuit of Stahlman in the vacuum field (such that the implement is a blower) would provide the distinct advantage of producing a more efficient and reponsive hydraulic circuit in various loading conditions by allowing the transmission to remain pressure responsive but non operational during idling and tuned to proper operating loading via the throttle valve 32.
In Reference to Claim 6:
Endoh as modified further discloses wherein the hydraulic implement is configured to operate a vacuum system (hydraulic motor 6060 drives vacuum pump 604; See also, Col 12 line 4) the hydraulic implement including a vacuum receiving hopper (602), the blower being operatively connected to the vacuum receiving hopper (602) to draw a vacuum in the vacuum receiving hopper. See, Guhr which the corresponding numbers cited to.
In Reference to Claim 7:
Endoh as modified further Guhr discloses wherein the hydraulic implement includes tubing (644) connected (via 640) to the blower and configured for the blower to draw the vacuum through a top of the vacuum receiver hoper (602). See, Figure 12 and Column 12 lines 31-34 of Guhr.
In Reference to Claim 8
Endoh as modified further discloses a baghouse filtration system (Filter chamber 632 as shown in Figure 12C) connected to toe top of the vacuum receiving hopper (602) wherein the blower and tubing are configured to draw the vacuum from the top of the vacuum receiving hopper through the baghouse filtration system.( via intermediate input port 630 and cyclonic separator 608 is an air filter 632 that filters air being pulled from the cyclonic separator into the vacuum pump 604) and the baghouse filtration. See, Guhr which the corresponding numbers cited to.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahlman, U.S. Patent Publication 2004/0060290 (hereinafter “Stahlman) in view of Reed, U.S. Patent 4,767,162 (hereinafter “Reed”) and in further view of Mienko et al., U.S. Patent Publication 4,788,821 (hereinafter “Mienko”).
In Reference to Claim 4:
Stahlman discloses all the limitations set forth in claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the motor is a high speed bent axis piston hydraulic motor drive.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Stahlman, specifically to modify the motor of Stahlman to be that of a high speed bent axis piston hydraulic motor drive because such a modification is merely a simple substitution of one known motor type for another providing the same predictable results.
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endoh, European Patent Publication EP 0227547 A2 (hereinafter “Endoh”) in view of Reed, U.S. Patent 4,767,162 (hereinafter “Reed”) and in further view of Mienko et al., U.S. Patent Publication 4,788,821 (hereinafter “Mienko”) in view of Guhr et al., U.S. Patent 7,415,748 (hereinafter “Guhr”) in further view of Wounderling, U.S. Patent 4,141,128 (hereinafter “Wounderling”).
In Reference to Claim 9:
Endoh as modified by Guhr discloses all the limitations set forth in claim 8, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the baghouse filtration includes a plurality of filters, each of the filters including a filter bag and a spring within the filter bag to generally maintain a shape of the filter during operation.
However, in the same field of endeavor, vacuum system, Wounderling discloses the use of a plurality of filter bags (Figure 1 and 16) each having a spring (Figure 2) to maintain their shape (Column 2, Lines 55-63).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to further modify Endoh with the teachings of Wounderling such the pre-existing filter of Stahlman be replaced with the plurality of filter bags as taught by Wounderling because such a modification is a simple substation of one suitable known filter for another (as further evidenced by Guhr which states “ it should be understood that other suitable air filter can be used in vacuum implement 200”).
In Reference to Claim 10 and 11:
Endoh as further modified by Wounderling further discloses wherein each of the plurality of filters have a neck, and the baghouse filtration includes a filter plate having a plurality of apertures configured to receive the plurality of filters, respectively, each of the plurality of filters being held in plate at the neck of the filter, and where air is drawn through the plurality of filters in the plurality of apertures through the tubing to the blower. See, Wounderling Figure 1 and 16.
Endoh as modified by Wounderling remains silent as to wherein each of the plurality of filter bags has a diameter of about 2 inches and a length of about 15 inches. However, Applicant has failed to provide a specific reason as to a specific benefit for the sizing recited by the claim. Therefore, such a further modification to the filtration system of Wounderling to be about 2 inches in diameter and 15 inches in length ( Wounderling is already cylindrical) would be obvious as a matter of design choice for fitting within the vacuum housing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL S. COLLINS whose telephone number is (313)446-6535. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00-5:30.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-4648. 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.
/DANIEL S COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745