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 an amendment filed on 1/05/2026. Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, 14, 16-19, and 21-25 are pending.
Response to Amendments
Amendments filed on 8/04/25 are under consideration. Claims 1, 2, 5, 11, 16, and 22-23 are amended. Claims 15, and 17-19 have been cancelled. Claims 24-25 have been added.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/05/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim 1, 4, and 6, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi (JP,2003-213728,A) and in view of Hasegawa et al. (JP 5793060 B2) and in further view of Camacho et al. (US 2016/0169413 Al).
Regarding claim 1 Doi teaches A construction machine (Pg. 1 – Title of the invention– “Working machine”) comprising: a main body unit revolvable by revolving of a revolving part; (Pg. 5 – [0009] – “…the machine body according to claim 1 includes a lower traveling body and an upper revolving body provided on the lower traveling body via a revolving bearing portion so as to be able to revolve…”) a working device connected to one end side of the main body unit; (Pg. 5 – [0009]- “…working device and a counterweight are provided on the upper revolving body…”) a drive system that drives at least one of the main body unit and the working device; (Pg. 4 – [0003] & [0004] – “On the other hand, recently, studies on the use of a fuel cell as a power source energy of a vehicle have been actively conducted. In this fuel cell, for example, in the case of a hydrogen-oxygen cell, hydrogen as a fuel and oxygen are chemically reacted to generate electricity, and a motor is driven by the electric power to run a vehicle. When the technique relating to the fuel cell is applied to a power source of a working machine such as a hydraulic excavator, a motor driven by electric power generated by the fuel cell using hydrogen or the like as fuel serves as a power source of the hydraulic excavator or the like.” (equates to a drive system that drives at least one of the main body unit and the working device as the quote shows the fuel source can be used to drive the vehicle and thus the main body as well as the excavator and thus the working device.)) the drive system including a fuel tank that stores fuel (Pg. 6 – [0023] – “in which hydrogen supplied from a hydrogen adsorbing metal 33 built in a counterweight 31 of a hydraulic excavator to a fuel cell main body 42”) wherein the mass body holds at least the fuel tank of the drive system (Pg. 5 – [0017] – “The counterweight 31 is provided with a container main body 32 formed in a hollow shape and a hydrogen adsorption metal 33 for the fuel cell filled in the container main body 32, and hydrogen as fuel for the fuel cell is adsorbed to the hydrogen adsorption metal 33 and stored.” (equates to wherein the mass body holds at least the fuel tank of the drive system as the hydrogen fuel cell is provided on the counterweight, which is seen from the quote, wherein this mass body is within the main body of the vehicle..)) and corrects an unbalanced load acting on the main body unit by driving the working device, (Pg. 5 – [0016] – “A counterweight 31 corresponding to the working device 16 is provided at a rear end portion of the upper swing structure 14, and a weight balance necessary for preventing the machine main body 11 from falling is secured by the counterweight 31.” & See Also Pg. 6 – [0029] – “The weight of the hydrogen adsorbing metal 33 is effectively utilized as a weight for balancing the weight with respect to the working device 16, and is useful for securing the stability of the machine body when an excavating work or the like accompanied by a turning operation is performed by the working device 16,” (equates to a mass body that corrects an unbalanced load acting on the main body unit by driving the working device as the counterweight is shown to be useful when the working device is being driven as seen from the second quote, where the counterweight from the first quote is 33 from the second quote.))
Yet Doi fails to teach and a mass body that comprises a shape extending in a plane orthogonal to a vertical direction and a control device that moves the mass body in a predetermined direction along the plane and orthogonal to the vertical direction to an outside of the main body unit to move the fuel tank to the outside of the main body unit when a leakage of the fuel is detected.
Hasegawa teaches a similar construction machine (abstract). Hasagawa teaches further comprising a control device that moves the mass body to the outside of the main body unit when the leakage detection sensor detects the leakage of the fuel (Pg. 3 – [0008] – “In order to prevent the extension of the hydraulic cylinder 25 due to leakage of pressurized oil from the control valve 53d, a conventional configuration has been adopted in which stop valves 60, 61 are provided in main lines 56, 57 respectively connecting the control valve 53d to the bottom chamber 25a and the rod chamber 25b of the hydraulic cylinder 25, as shown in FIG. 8, and the stop valves 60, 61 are kept closed except during the installation or removal of the counterweight, thereby preventing leakage of pressurized oil” & See Also Pg. 4 – [0011] – “In view of the above problems, the present invention has an object to provide a hydraulic circuit for a counterweight installation/removal device that can prevent the thermal expansion of the hydraulic cylinder for lifting and lowering the counterweight from damaging the connection between the counterweight and the rotating arm, and can prevent excessive load from being placed on the lifting hydraulic cylinder.” & See Also Fig. 1 (equates to comprising a control device that moves the mass body to an outside of the main body unit when the leakage detection sensor detects the leakage of the fuel as the first quote shows the fuel leaking and the second quote shows the counter weight is lifted or lowered during this process to ensure proper functionality of the construction machine’s counterweight and rotating arm. Figure 1 shows the movement of the counterweight or mass body occurring on the outside of the mass body.))
Yet both fail to teach and a mass body that comprises a shape extending in a plane orthogonal to a vertical direction. and a control device that moves the mass body in a predetermined direction along the plane and orthogonal to the vertical direction to an outside of the main body unit
Camacho teaches and a mass body that comprises a shape extending in a plane orthogonal to a vertical direction. (Pg. 3 – Fig. 2 & See Also Pg. 1 – Abstract – “A pipelayer includes an undercarriage, a boom movable relative to the undercarriage in a first lateral direction, and a counterweight movable relative to the undercarriage in a second lateral direction opposite the first lateral direction and ranging between a deployed position and a retracted position.” (equates to and a mass body that comprises a shape extending in a plane orthogonal to a vertical direction as the figure shows the counterweight extending horizontally from the vertically direction of the scene, wherein the lateral movement done by the counterweight further exemplifies the shape extending in the orthogonal direction to move laterally to the vertical direction. )) and a control device that moves the mass body in a predetermined direction along the plane and orthogonal to the vertical direction to an outside of the main body unit (Pg. 3 – Fig. 2 & See Also Pg. 3 – Fig. 3 & See Also Pg. 4 – Fig. 4 & See Also Pg. 1 – Abstract – “A pipelayer includes an undercarriage, a boom movable relative to the undercarriage in a first lateral direction, and a counterweight movable relative to the undercarriage in a second lateral direction opposite the first lateral direction and ranging between a deployed position and a retracted position.” & See Also Pg. 8 – [0030] – “For the purposes of this disclosure, the lateral distance that the boom 124 is extended away from the undercarriage 102 is referred to as boom overhang 146. More specifically, the boom overhang 146 may be the lateral distance from the outside edge of the second drive track 106” (equates to and a control device that moves the mass body in a predetermined direction along the plane and orthogonal to the vertical direction to an outside of the main body unit as the first quote shows the lateral or orthogonal to the vertical direction of the counterweight being moved in response to the boom position of the construction vehicle. The figures 2-4 show the lateral direction of the boom being orthogonal to the vertical direction wherein the counterweight moves in the lateral direction opposing the boom direction. ) ) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi-Hasegawa to include fand a mass body that comprises a shape extending in a plane orthogonal to a vertical direction. and a control device that moves the mass body in a predetermined direction along the plane and orthogonal to the vertical direction to an outside of the main body unit as these limitations allow for a different type of operation to occur with the construction machine ensuring any load too great for the normal center of gravity of the machine can be counteracted by use of the orthogonal deployment of the counterweight.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include and a mass body that comprises a shape extending in a plane orthogonal to a vertical direction. and a control device that moves the mass body in a predetermined direction along the plane and orthogonal to the vertical direction to an outside of the main body unit as this allows for a wider variety of operations to be conducted with the machine ensuring stability during any movement that is too great for the machines normal center of mass.
Regarding claim 4 Doi-Hasegawa-Camacho teaches (Doi discloses the following limitations:) The construction machine according to claim 1, wherein the fuel tank stores fuel that does not emit greenhouse gas. (Pg. 4 – [0003] – “On the other hand, recently, studies on the use of a fuel cell as a power source energy of a vehicle have been actively conducted. In this fuel cell, for example, in the case of a hydrogen-oxygen cell, hydrogen as a fuel and oxygen are chemically reacted to generate electricity, and a motor is driven by the electric power to run a vehicle” (equates to wherein the fuel tank stores fuel that does not emit greenhouse gas as the prior art uses a hydrogen-oxygen fuel cell. ))
Regarding claim 6 Doi-Hasagawa-Camacho teaches The construction machine according claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet Doi fails to teach wherein the mass body moves according to movement of the working device.
Hasegawa teaches a similar construction machine (abstract). Hasegawa teaches wherein the mass body moves according to movement of the working device. (Pg. 4 – [0011] – “In view of the above problems, the present invention has an object to provide a hydraulic circuit for a counterweight installation/removal device that can prevent the thermal expansion of the hydraulic cylinder for lifting and lowering the counterweight from damaging the connection between the counterweight and the rotating arm, and can prevent excessive load from being placed on the lifting hydraulic cylinder.” (equates to wherein the mass body moves according to movement of the working device as the counterweight is adjustable as the counter weight can be raised or lowered)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include wherein the mass body moves according to movement of the working device as this allows the counterweight to be dynamically adjustable and better counteract heavy loads put upon the construction machine.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the mass body moves according to movement of the working device as this ensures the center of gravity is compensated for regardless of the machine operation and allows for more robust operations to take place with the working device as the counterweight isn’t static.
Regarding claim 25 Doi-Hasagawa-Camacho teaches (Doi teaches the following limitations:) The construction machine according to claim 1, further comprising a traveling device that includes a pair of crawlers (Pg. 2 – [0012] - “”The lower traveling body 12 is provided with a traveling hydraulic motor for driving the crawler belt,) and that is configured to move the main body unit, (Pg. 1 – [0011] – “A machine main body 11 of the hydraulic excavator includes a lower traveling body 12” ) wherein the main body unit is positioned inside the pair of crawlers with respect to a top view of the main body unit. (Pg. Drawing Page 1 - Fig. 1 )
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi-Hasegawa-Camacho in view of Cserw (US 2022/0162812 Al).
Regarding claim 2 Doi-Hasegawa teaches The construction machine according to claim 1 as previously mapped above.
Yet both fails to teach wherein: the drive system includes an engine, and the mass body holds the engine.
Cserw teaches a similar construction machine (abstract). Cserw teaches wherein the drive system includes an engine, (Pg. 17 – [0058] – “The engine 210 may include a drive shaft 215 that drives the generator 220. The generator 220 responsively generates electric power that is used to drive the drive motors 140A to 140D.” (equates to wherein the drive system includes an engine as the engine is used to generate power for the drive system by supplying its energy to the generator which in turn drives the drive motor to move the construction machine,)) and the mass body holds the engine. (Pg. 17 – [0058] – “For example, an engine 210 and a generator 220 may be mounted on and supported by the counterweight.”). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include wherein the drive system includes an engine, and the mass body holds the engine as the use of the engine allows for another type of fuel to be used within the drive system and thus a different way to mitigate the byproduct of greenhouse gases as seen in similar styled vehicles, as well as, including the engine on the mass body or counterweight ensures the weight is heavy enough to counteract any force that may be put on the working device.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the drive system includes an engine, and the mass body holds the engine as different fuel type can be used and the compactness of the system can be increased as the power generator for the drive system can be housed within the main body where the mass body exists.
Regarding claim 5 Doi-Hasegawa-Camacho teaches The construction machine according to claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet both fails to teach wherein: the drive system includes a generator that supplies power, and the mass body holds the generator.
Cserw teaches a similar construction machine (abstract). Cserw teaches wherein: the drive system includes a generator that supplies power, (Pg. 17 – [0058] – “The generator 220 responsively generates electric power that is used to drive the drive motors 140A to 140D” ) and the mass body holds the generator. (Pg. 17 – [0058] – “For example, an engine 210 and a generator 220 may be mounted on and supported by the counterweight 130.”). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include wherein the drive system includes a generator that supplies power, and the mass body holds the generator as the use of the generator allows for another type of fuel to be used within the drive system and thus a different way to mitigate the byproduct of greenhouse gases as seen in similar styled vehicles, as well as, including the generator on the mass body or counterweight ensures the weight is heavy enough to counteract any force that may be put on the working device.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the drive system includes a generator that supplies power, and the mass body holds the generator as different fuel type can be used and the compactness of the system can be increased as the power converter for the drive system can be housed within the main body where the mass body exists.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi-Hasegawa- Camacho as applied above, and further in view of Zerbe (US 2005/0184495 Al).
Regarding claim 7 Doi-Hasegawa- Camacho teaches The construction machine according to claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet all fail to teach further comprising a leakage detection sensor that detects the leakage of the fuel used in the drive system.
Zerbe teaches similar safety methods implemented into the working vehicle (abstract). Zerbe teaches further comprising a leakage detection sensor that detects the leakage of the fuel used in the drive system. (Pg. 13 – [0089] – “In an embodiment of this kind, in which a combustion engine is used instead of the fuel cell system, a safety system is provided in order to detect gas leakages and to switch off the drive source.” (equates to further comprising a leakage detection sensor that detects leakage of fuel used in the drive system as the drive source is stopped when gas leakage is detected and thus is for fuel being supplied to the drive system.)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include further comprising a leakage detection sensor that detects the leakage of the fuel used in the drive system as this allows for a safer work environment and operation of the construction machine to be had by the operator.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising further comprising a leakage detection sensor that detects the leakage of the fuel used in the drive system as this ensures when fuel is being depleted at a rapid rate the operator can have a better understanding of the system and why it is behaving as such as well as a safer operation can be had and leaking fuel doesn’t have to be breathed in by any at the job site.
Regarding claim 8 Doi-Hasegawa- Camacho -Zerbe teaches, The construction machine according to claim 7, as previously mapped above.
Yet Doi-Hasegawa fails to teach wherein the leakage detection sensor detects the fuel in a gas state.
Zerbe teaches similar safety methods implemented into the working vehicle (abstract). Zerbe teaches wherein the leakage detection sensor detects the fuel in a gas state. (Pg. 13 – [0089] – “… a safety system is provided in order to detect gas leakages…”). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi-Hasegawa to include wherein the leakage detection sensor detects the fuel in a gas state as this ensures if the fuel is stored in a gaseous state then the fuel leakage can be detected.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the leakage detection sensor detects the fuel in a gas state as this ensures the fuel leaking isn’t contaminating the work site as and going undetected as may not be visible to anyone monitoring the site.
Claims 11, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi and in view of Yoichi (JP2020011592A) and in further view of Covi (US 5,119,059) and in view of Yoshinada et al. (A dual-arm construction robot with remote-control function).
Regarding claim 11 Doi teaches A construction machine comprising: a main body unit revolvable by revolving of a revolving part; (Pg. 5 – [0009] – “…the machine body according to claim 1 includes a lower traveling body and an upper revolving body provided on the lower traveling body via a revolving bearing portion so as to be able to revolve…”) a working device connected to one end side of the main body unit; (Pg. 5 – [0009]- “…working device and a counterweight are provided on the upper revolving body…”) a fuel tank that is provided inside another end side of the main body unit and stores a fuel that does not emit greenhouse gas; (Pg. 5 – [0021] – “The hydrogen adsorbing metal 33 can store hydrogen of a volume of 1000 times or more in the metal in a more compact and stable form than liquid hydrogen even in a state close to normal temperature and normal pressure.” & See Also Pg. 5 – [0017] – “The counterweight 31 is provided with a container main body 32 formed in a hollow shape and a hydrogen adsorption metal 33 for the fuel cell filled in the container main body 32” (equates to a fuel tank that is provided inside another end side of the main body unit and stores a fuel that does not emit greenhouse gas as the hydrogen is seen to be stored in a fuel cell and thus power the vehicle.))
Yet Doi fails to teach and at which an unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off and landing; a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power, generated by the fuel, to the power reception device of the unmanned flying object; and a shielding portion provided above the revolving part that surrounds at least a part of the power supply or the unmanned flying object, wherein the blocking unit blocks electromagnetic noise generated from the power supply.
Yoichi discloses a similar work machine with a drone attachment ([0002]). Yoichi discloses a and at which an unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off and landing. (Pg.1 – [0002] – “remote control device connected to the work machine via a wireless line is installed in a control center away from the work site.” & See Also Pg. 3 – “takeoff and landing section and the aircraft takeoff and landing section is transported by an unmanned work machine for transportation.” & See Also Pg. 1 – [0002]- “drones) equipped with cameras and batteries have been used for surveillance purposes, and it is conceivable that such vehicles could be flown above a work site to capture images of multiple work machines and obtain image information from the images,” & See Also Pg. 2- [0005] –“ place the aircraft connected to the power supply unit via a power supply cable on top of the housing” (equates to and at which an unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off and landing. as the first quote shows the work machine is similar to the one described in this application, the second quote shows the takeoff and landing pad is implemented in the work machine, and the third quote shows the takeoff and landing pad being used for the drone or unmanned flying object. Lastly, the fourth quote shows the drone being connected a power supply cable and thus has a power reception device.)), generated by the fuel, to the power reception device of the unmanned flying object; (Pg. 6 – [0015] – “inside the housing 36 are housed a power generation device 46 that generates electricity using fuel, a fuel tank 48 that stores fuel” & See Also Pg. 2- [0005] –“ place the aircraft connected to the power supply unit via a power supply cable on top of the housing” (equates to a power supply that supplies power, generated by the fuel, to the power reception device of the unmanned flying object as the first quote show the fuel stored within the working machine capable of generating electricity for the power generation device wherein the second quote shows that device being connected to the aircraft for powering it.) ) shielding portion that surrounds at least a part of the power supply or the unmanned flying object (Pg. 24 – [0057] – “the sheet 92 covers the aircraft 38 located on the aircraft take-off and landing area 44 from above and from the sides, thereby protecting the aircraft 38 from rainwater, which is advantageous in preventing breakdowns and deterioration of the aircraft 38 and improving the durability of the aircraft 38” (equates to shielding portion that surrounds at least a part of the power supply or the unmanned flying object as the quote shows a shielding portion of the drone housing that covers the unmanned flying object from the elements.))
Yet Doi-Yoichi fails to teach a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part; a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power and portion provided above the revolving part, wherein the shielding portion shields electromagnetic noise generated from the power supply.
Covi teaches wherein the shielding portion shields blocks electromagnetic noise generated from the power supply. (Pg. 4 – Col. 1 – lines 44-46– “Most common is the provision of power supply shielding to surround and contain EMI emissions from the power supply” (equates to and a blocking unit that surrounds at least a part of the power supply or the unmanned flying object, wherein the blocking unit blocks electromagnetic noise generated from the power supply as quote shows shielding the power supply from EMI and any emissions from the power supply itself.)).
Yet Doi-Yochi-Covi fail to teach a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part; a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power; portion provided above the revolving part
Yoshinada teaches a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part (Pg. 14 - fig. 5.7 & See Also Pg. 12 – fig. 5.6 (equates to a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part as the figure 5.7 shows the takeoff portion for the drone and figure 5.6 specifically shows the takeoff portion being above the revolving portion of the construction vehicle )) a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power (Pg. 31 – “ However, when the tether is used as a power supply, its weight is not negligible” & See Also Pg. 29 - Figure on top of page – (equates to power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power as the quote shows the tether supplying power to the drone and the figure showing the tether is extending above the revolving portion of the construction machine.) ) portion provided above the revolving part (Pg. 14 - fig. 5.7 & See Also Pg. 12 – fig. 5.6 (equates to portion provided above the revolving part as the figures show the helipad the drone is landing on and taking off from being located above the revolving part of the construction vehicle.)) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi-Yoichi-Covi to include teach a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part; a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power; portion provided above the revolving part as these limitations allow for a drone to be easily deployed and transported along with the construction machine allowing for a 3rd person point of view when needed at all times during the operation of the construction machine.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include teach a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part; a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power; portion provided above the revolving part as these limitations allow for the drone, power supplying and launch pad to all be located above the construction vehicle allowing for simple configuration including all needed elements to understand the scene the vehicle is working when viewing the machine from a remote location.
Regarding claim 14 Doi-Yoichi-Covi- Yoshinada teaches The construction machine according to claim 11, as previously mapped above.
Yet Doi-Covi- Yoshinada fails to teach further comprising an antenna is provided in the take-off and landing portion, wherein the antenna communicates with the unmanned flying object.
Yoichi discloses a similar work machine with a drone attachment ([0002]). Yoichi discloses further comprising an antenna is provided in the take-off and landing portion, wherein the antenna communicates with the unmanned flying object. (Pg. 5 – [0017] – “The housing side communication unit 50 has a housing side antenna 5002 for the second wireless line C2, and transmits aircraft operation command information sent from the aircraft remote control command unit 22 via the second wireless line C2 to the aircraft 38” & See Also Pg. 25 – Original Document – Fig. 14. (equates to further comprising an antenna is provided in the take-off and landing portion, wherein the antenna communicates with the unmanned flying object.as the housing is provided on the upper surface of the work vehicle and the antenna is attached to the housing and the figure shows the drone landing on the housing where the antenna is located.)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi-Covi to include further comprising an antenna is provided in the take-off and landing portion, wherein the antenna communicates with the unmanned flying object.as this ensures an open line of communication is had between the work vehicle and the drone ensuring each can communicate with each other at all times.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising an antenna is provided in the take-off and landing portion, wherein the antenna communicates with the unmanned flying object.as the work vehicle and the drone can be in constant communication with one another.
Claims 15, 17, 18, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi and in view of Yoshinada et al. (A dual-arm construction robot with remote-control function).
Regarding claim 15 Doi teaches A construction machine comprising: a main body unit revolvable by revolving of a first revolving part; (Pg. 5 – [0009] – “…the machine body according to claim 1 includes a lower traveling body and an upper revolving body provided on the lower traveling body via a revolving bearing portion so as to be able to revolve…”) a first working device connected to one end side of the main body unit; (Pg. 5 – [0009]- “…working device and a counterweight are provided on the upper revolving body…”) ; and a fuel tank provided in the housing unit and stores liquid a fuel that does not emit greenhouse gas. (Pg. 5 – [0021] – “The hydrogen adsorbing metal 33 can store hydrogen of a volume of 1000 times or more in the metal in a more compact and stable form than liquid hydrogen even in a state close to normal temperature and normal pressure.” & See Also Pg. 5 – [0017] – “The counterweight 31 is provided with a container main body 32 formed in a hollow shape and a hydrogen adsorption metal 33 for the fuel cell filled in the container main body 32” & See Also Pg. 6 – [0026] – “a fuel cell 51 that can be housed in the container main body 32 of the counterweight 31,” (equates to and a fuel tank provided in the housing unit and that stores liquid a fuel that does not emit greenhouse gas as the hydrogen can be stored in a liquid form and the last quote shows it is in the housing unit of the main body..))
Yet Doi fails to teach a second working device connected to another end side of the main body unit; a housing unit provided at an upper part of the main body unit and connected to the main body unit;
Yoshinada discloses a similar construction machine (abstract). Yoshinada teaches a second working device connected to another end side of the main body unit; (Pg. 12 - Fig. 5.6 & See Also Pg. 8 - Fig. 5.3 (equates to a second working device connected to another end side of the main body unit as the lower rotating can be swung to the opposite end of the working vehicle and thus both work devices can be at opposite ends.)) a housing unit provided at an upper part of the main body unit and connected to the main body unit; (Pg. 29 - Fig. 5.18 & See Also Pg. 8 - Fig. 5.3 & See Also Pg. 12 - Fig. 5.6 & See Also Pg. 13 – 5.1.3.2 – “A multi-rotor aerial vehicle (drone) is mounted on the helipad installed on this robot”– (equates a housing unit provided at an upper part of the main body unit and connected to the main body unit; as the figure 5.6 shows the drone house unit on top of the work vehicle wherein the quote supplied furthers the fact it is helipad for the drone to be housed and takeoff from..)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include a second working device connected to another end side of the main body unit; a housing unit provided at an upper part of the main body unit and connected to the main body unit; as this limitation make the working vehicle much more robust and able to handle a wide variety of applications such as going into hard to balance regions or to perform more nimble tasks with the added working device and degree of freedom.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a second working device connected to another end side of the main body unit; a housing unit provided at an upper part of the main body unit and connected to the main body unit; as this makes the working vehicle more versatile and fit for a broader range of applications by way of two working devices and ability for a drone to be housed for aerial viewing coverage.
Regarding claim 17 Doi-Yoshinada teaches (Doi Discloses the following limitations:) The construction machine according to claim 15, further comprising a control device that controls the first revolving part, (Pg. 6 – [0028] – “the hydraulic oil pressurized and supplied from the hydraulic pump 46 to the hydraulic control circuit 47 is controlled, various hydraulic motors 48 and hydraulic cylinders 26,27,28 of the hydraulic excavator are operated, the traveling of the lower traveling body 12, the turning of the upper turning body 14,” (equates to comprising a control device that controls the first revolving part as the hydraulic oil control circuit is controlled to rotate the upper body with respect to the lower body. )) the first working device, (Pg. 6 – [0028] – “hydraulic oil pressurized and supplied from the hydraulic pump 46 to the hydraulic control circuit 47 is controlled, various hydraulic motors 48 and hydraulic cylinders 26,27,28 of the hydraulic excavator are operated, the traveling of the lower traveling body 12, the turning of the upper turning body 14, and the rotation of the boom 21, the arm 23, and the bucket 25are controlled,” (equates to further comprising a control device that controls , the first working device as the boom arm and bucket are al controlled by the hydraulic control circuit and thus the first working device is controlled.))
Yet Doi fails to teach further comprising a control device that controls a second revolving part that is different from the first revolving part and is revolvable with respect to the housing unit and the second working device.
Yoshinada discloses a similar construction machine (abstract). Yoshinada teaches further comprising a control device that controls a second revolving part that is different from the first revolving part and is revolvable with respect to the housing unit (Pg. 95 – 5.5.1.2 – “The encoders measure the relative angle between upper body and lower body, lower body and track.” Pg. 8 - Fig. 5.3 & See Also Pg. 29 - Fig. 5.18 & See Also Pg. 23 - Fig. 5.13 (equates to comprising a control device that controls a second revolving part that is different from the first revolving part and is revolvable with respect to the housing unit as the quote shows an upper and lower revolving body each comprising their own work device and rotatable about an axis of the work vehicle, wherein the figures show the first and second revolving bodies rotating about the axis which the housing of the drone is kept upon..)) and the second working device. (Pg. 8 - Fig. 5.3 & See Also Pg. 29 - fig. 5.18 & See Also Pg. 23 - Fig. 5.13 (equates to further comprising a control device that controls the second revolving part as the article shows how a human operator can control each working device including the second working device.)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include further comprising a control device that controls a second revolving part that is different from the first revolving part and is revolvable with respect to the housing unit and the second working device as this limitations make the working vehicle much more robust and able to handle a wide variety of applications such as going into hard to balance regions or to perform more nimble tasks with the added working device and degree of freedom.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising a control device that controls a second revolving part that is different from the first revolving part and is revolvable with respect to the housing unit and the second working device as this makes the working vehicle more versatile and fit for a broader range of applications.
Regarding claim 18 Doi-Yoshinada teaches (Doi discloses the following limitations:) The construction machine according to claim 17, wherein the control device performs control to revolve the first revolving part (Pg. 6 – [0028] – “the hydraulic oil pressurized and supplied from the hydraulic pump 46 to the hydraulic control circuit 47 is controlled, various hydraulic motors 48 and the turning of the upper turning body 14,”)
Yet Doi fails to teach and the second revolving part, and control to revolve the second revolving part without revolving the first revolving part.
Yoshinada discloses a similar construction machine (abstract). Yoshinada teaches and the second revolving part, (Pg. 8 - Fig. 5.3 & See Also Pg. 29 - fig. 5.18 & See Also Pg. 23 - Fig. 5.13 (equates to wherein the control device performs control the second revolving part as the article shows how a human operator can control each position of each working device and thus control the second rotating and first rotating parts respectively..)) and control to revolve the second revolving part without revolving the first revolving part. (Pg. 8 - Fig. 5.3 (equates to and control to revolve the second revolving part without revolving the first revolving part as the figure shows how the working device with the bucket can remain in the same position and not move while the second working device with the gripper attachment moves to a location similar to the first working device.)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include and the second revolving part, and control to revolve the second revolving part without revolving the first revolving part as this allows for more operations to take place with the construction machine thus making it more versatile and capable to be utilized in a wider variety of applications.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include and the second revolving part, and control to revolve the second revolving part without revolving the first revolving part as this makes the construction machine more dexterous and capable of completing a wider variety of tasks ensuring that if both working devices are needed to face the same direction then this is possible.
Regarding claim 19 Doi-Yoshinada teaches The construction machine according to claim 17, as previously mapped above.
Yet Doi fails to teach wherein the control device revolves the second revolving part when at least one of the first working device and the second working device performs operation different from the revolving.
Yoshinada discloses a similar construction machine (abstract). Yoshinada teaches wherein the control device revolves the second revolving part when at least one of the first working device and the second working device performs operation different from the revolving. (Pg. 23 - Fig. 5.13 (equates to wherein the control device revolves the second revolving part when at least one of the first working device and the second working device performs operation different from the revolving as the figure shows how the swing can be done independently of the actuation of the working devices thus the revolving can be done separately of actuating the working devices. )). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include wherein the control device revolves the second revolving part when at least one of the first working device and the second working device performs operation different from the revolving as this ensures that movement of the machine body to orient itself is not tied to the operation of the working devices.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the control device revolves the second revolving part when at least one of the first working device and the second working device performs operation different from the revolving as movement and proper orientation of the working vehicle can be had while the working devices ae still able to manipulate the environment as the operator sees fit.
Regarding claim 20 Doi- Yoshinada teaches The construction machine according to claim 15, as mapped above.
Yet Doi fails to teach wherein the housing unit is provided at an upper part of the main body unit.
Yoshinada discloses a similar construction machine (abstract). Yoshinada teaches wherein the housing unit is provided at an upper part of the main body unit. (Pg. 28 - Fig. 5.18 (equates to wherein the housing unit is provided at an upper part of the main body unit as the drone housing unit is attached to the upper portion of the main body of this art.)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi to include wherein the housing unit is provided at an upper part of the main body unit as this gives a prime location for the drone attachment to be located upon the construction vehicles ensuring it is out of the way of potential road obstacles and the working devices.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the housing unit is provided at an upper part of the main body unit as this ensures the drone and the landing portion are out of the way of working operation allowing for more robust applications to take place.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi-Hasagawa- Camacho in view of Shironi (JP2012001913A).
Regarding claim 10 Doi-Hasagawa- Camacho teaches The construction machine according to claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet Doi-Hasagawa- Camacho fails to teach further comprising a notification device that notifies that the mass body moves.
Shironi teaches a similar construction machine (Fig. 1). Shironi teaches further comprising a notification device that notifies that the mass body moves. (Pg. 10 - [0035] – “The monitor console 8 thus equipped with output and input functions displays, for example, a message prompting the operator to adjust the position of the weight 11 or a message indicating that the position of the weight 11 is being adjusted, thereby providing the operator with information about the counterweight 6.” (equates to further comprising a notification device that notifies that the mass body moves as the monitor alerts the operator the counter weight is moving thus acting as a notification device. )) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi as this allows the operator to better understand what is currently happening to the construction vehicle and ensures that they know whether or not to move the working devices while the counter weight is being activated.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising a notification device that notifies that the mass body moves As within the remote environment the operator needs to fully understand what is happening to the construction vehicle at any given moment to best be able to operate upon any given site.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi- Hasagawa- Camacho as applied above, and further in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2010/0288249 Al).
Regarding claim 16 Doi- Hasagawa- Camacho teaches The construction machine according to claim 1, as mapped above previously.
Yet all fail to teach wherein the fuel stored in the fuel tank is ammonia.
Sasaki discloses a similar internal combustible engine with vehicular application utilizing liquid ammonia as the source ([0001]). Sasaki teaches wherein the fuel stored in the fuel tank is ammonia. (Pg. 5 – [0013] – “According to another aspect of the present invention, a fuel system for an internal combustion engine is provided which comprises a fuel tank to store liquid ammonia;”). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi - Yoshinada to include wherein the fuel stored in the fuel tank is ammonia as it is simple to store and transport when compared to other renewable energy sources.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the fuel stored in the fuel tank is ammonia as it has high energy density making it a good source for fuel and relative ease of storing and transporting the fuel when compared to other non-greenhouse gas emitting options.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi – Hasegawa-Camacho and in view of Yoon (KR 20020004149 A)
Regarding claim 21 Doi-Hasagawa- Camacho teaches The construction machine according to claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet all fail to teach wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with a remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank.
Yoon teaches wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with a remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank (Pg. – 4 – [0006]-- “in which a uniform amount of fuel is supplied to a fuel pump while the rear of the fuel tank moves up and down according to the driving angle of the automobile and the amount of fuel stored in the fuel tank” (equates to wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with a remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank as the application claims the mass body containing the fuel tank and this quote show how the fuel tank is moved in accordance with the fuel amount.)) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi-Hasagawa to include wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with a remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank as this limitation allows for a further variable to be considered when moving the mass body around for stabilizing the working vehicle thus ensuring the proper amount of force is delivered based on an amount of weight currently on the mass body.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with a remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank as this limitation ensures the proper leveling of the working vehicle is attained while considering the mass on the mass body.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi – Hasegawa- Camacho -Yoon and in further view of Santo (US 11,499,291 B2)
Regarding claim 22 Doi-Hasagawa- Camacho -Yoon teaches The construction machine according to claim 21, as previously mapped above.
Yet Doi-Hasagawa fails to teach further comprising an attitude detect sensor that detects an attitude of the main body unit; wherein the control device moves the mass body in accordance with the remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank and an attitude detection result of the attitude detect sensor.
Yoon teaches wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with the remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank(Pg. – 4 – [0006]-- “in which a uniform amount of fuel is supplied to a fuel pump while the rear of the fuel tank moves up and down according to the driving angle of the automobile and the amount of fuel stored in the fuel tank” (equates to wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with a remaining amount of the fuel stored in the fuel tank as the application claims the mass body containing the fuel tank and this quote show how the fuel tank is moved in accordance with the fuel amount.))
Yet Doi-Hasagawa-Yoon fails to teach further comprising an attitude detect sensor that detects an attitude of the main body unit; wherein the control device moves the mass body in accordance with an attitude detection result of the attitude detect sensor.
Santo teaches comprising an attitude detect sensor that detects an attitude of the main body unit; (Pg. 14 – Col. 5 – lines – 36 – 39 – “The controller preferably also keeps the base element of the work machine in an essentially horizontal attitude by means of the inclination sensors (semiconductor gyroscopes)” (equates to comprising an attitude detect sensor that detects the attitude of the main body unit; as the quote shows an attitude detection sensor to achieve horizontal balance of the work vehicle.)) wherein the control device moves the mass body in accordance with an attitude detection result of the attitude detect sensor (Pg. 12 – Col. 1 – lines 52 – 55 – “In order to ensure a stable attitude of the vehicle in such load situations, in the work machines a counterweight is attached to the opposite end of the vehicle to the end with the attached implement,”& See Also Pg. 14 – Col. 5 – lines 33-42 – “This also can bring about a situation in which the horizontal attitude of the counterweight does not change during shifting along the longitudinal axis. The controller preferably also keeps the base element of the work machine in an essentially horizontal attitude by means of the inclination sensors (semiconductor gyroscopes), since by virtue of the parallelogram guide the position of the counterweight corresponds essentially to the position of the base element on which the lever elements and the auxiliary lever elements are arranged.” (equates to wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with an attitude detection result of the attitude detect sensor as the attitude detection sensor is seen to be on the base element of the work vehicle which the quote shows the counterweight responds to the position of the base element and the position is unchanging in this example to attain the desired result from said sensor value..))It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi-Hasagawa-Yoon to include wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with an attitude detection result of the attitude detect sensor as this limitation ensures the vehicle is fully upright and further prevents leakages from happening by unnecessary loads being distributed upon fuel tanks and power systems.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the control device that moves the mass body in accordance with an attitude detection result of the attitude detect sensor as this limitation allows for unexpected loads put upon the construction vehicle to be minimized by way of moving the mass body to maintain an even level of the working vehicle.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi – Yoichi – Covi-Yoshinada and in view of Zhicheng (TWM586238U)
Regarding claim 23 Doi – Yoichi - Covi - Yoshinada teaches The construction machine according to claim 11, as previously mapped above.
Yet all fail to teach wherein the shielding portion shields a second electromagnetic noise generated from the unmanned flying object when the unmanned flying object is landing on the take-off and landing portion.
Zhicheng teaches wherein the shielding portion shields a second electromagnetic noise generated from the unmanned flying object when the unmanned flying object is landing on the take-off and landing portion. (Pg. 1 – [5] – “ The main purpose of this creation is to provide a drone landing gear antenna mechanism so that the drone's landing gear is the antenna, so as to simplify the mounting of the drone's fuselage, reduce the shielding and interference of the body and attachments to the antenna, and improve Transmission efficiency…The unmanned helicopter landing gear antenna mechanism integrates an antenna tube made of glass fiber into a part of the landing bracket. The other parts are made of aluminum tubes (or other metal tubes). The aluminum tube allows the antenna line to pass through, and the antenna tube is actually equipped with the antenna ” (equates to wherein the blocking unit blocks a second electromagnetic noise generated from the unmanned flying object when the unmanned flying object is landing on the take-off and landing portion as the quote shows the landing gear antenna mechanism being used to reduce interference as experienced by the drone, the end of the quote show s a specific blocking unit equipped around the antenna so the vehicle has better range of communication. )). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi – Yoichi - Covi to include wherein the blocking unit blocks a second electromagnetic noise generated from the unmanned flying object when the unmanned flying object is landing on the take-off and landing portion as this allows for an easier time landing the drone and ensuring less signal interference is occurring at a high risk moment of crashing.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the blocking unit blocks a second electromagnetic noise generated from the unmanned flying object when the unmanned flying object is landing on the take-off and landing portion as this allows proper communication to take place between the grounded vehicle and the drone ensuring a safe arrival is had each and every time.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doi – Hasagawa - Yoon and in view of Camacho ((US 2016/0169413 Al).)
Regarding claim 24 Doi-Hasagawa-Camacho teaches (Doi discloses the following limitations:) The construction machine according to claim 1, further comprising a traveling device that includes a pair of crawlers (Pg. 2 – [0012] - “”The lower traveling body 12 is provided with a traveling hydraulic motor for driving the crawler belt,) and that is configured to move the main body unit, (Pg. 1 – [0011] – “A machine main body 11 of the hydraulic excavator includes a lower traveling body 12” )
Yet Doi fails to teach wherein the fuel tank moves to the outside of the main body unit and a portion of the mass body is positioned outside the pair of crawlers with respect to a top view of the main body unit.
Yoon teaches wherein the fuel tank moves (Pg. – 4 – [0006]-- “in which a uniform amount of fuel is supplied to a fuel pump while the rear of the fuel tank moves up and down according to the driving angle of the automobile and the amount of fuel stored in the fuel tank” (equates to wherein the fuel tank moves as the quote shows the fuel tank moving in accordance to the amount of fuel left in the tank.))
Yet all fail to teach to the outside of the main body unit and a portion of the mass body is positioned outside the pair of crawlers with respect to a top view of the main body unit.
Camacho teaches to the outside of the main body unit (Pg. 3 – Fig. 2 & See Also Pg. 3 – Fig. 3 & See Also Pg. 4 – Fig. 4 & See Also Pg. 1 – Abstract – “A pipelayer includes an undercarriage, a boom movable relative to the undercarriage in a first lateral direction, and a counterweight movable relative to the undercarriage in a second lateral direction opposite the first lateral direction and ranging between a deployed position and a retracted position.” & See Also Pg. 8 – [0030] – “For the purposes of this disclosure, the lateral distance that the boom 124 is extended away from the undercarriage 102 is referred to as boom overhang 146. More specifically, the boom overhang 146 may be the lateral distance from the outside edge of the second drive track 106” (equates to: to the outside of the main body unit as the quote shows the mass body moving to a position laterally away from the construction vehicle. )) and a portion of the mass body is positioned outside the pair of crawlers with respect to a top view of the main body unit. Pg. 3 – Fig. 2 & See Also Pg. 3 – Fig. 3 & See Also Pg. 4 – Fig. 4 & See Also Pg. 1 – Abstract – “A pipelayer includes an undercarriage, a boom movable relative to the undercarriage in a first lateral direction, and a counterweight movable relative to the undercarriage in a second lateral direction opposite the first lateral direction and ranging between a deployed position and a retracted position.” & See Also Pg. 8 – [0030] – “For the purposes of this disclosure, the lateral distance that the boom 124 is extended away from the undercarriage 102 is referred to as boom overhang 146. More specifically, the boom overhang 146 may be the lateral distance from the outside edge of the second drive track 106” (equates to and a portion of the mass body is positioned outside the pair of crawlers with respect to a top view of the main body unit. As the quote shows the mass body moving to a position outside of the crawlers of the vehicle and as seen from the figures provided the mass body is outside of the crawlers when viewed from a top down point of view )) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Doi-Hasagawa-Yoon to include to the outside of the main body unit and a portion of the mass body is positioned outside the pair of crawlers with respect to a top view of the main body unit as these limitations allow for a wider range of center of gravity values to be attained when moving the counterweight to a position outside of the construction machine.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include to the outside of the main body unit and a portion of the mass body is positioned outside the pair of crawlers with respect to a top view of the main body unit as this allows for the counterweight to be movable over a variety of positions within the construction vehicle allowing for potentially greater loads to be handled by a construction machine.
Response to Arguments:
Response to 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection of claims 1, 3, and 4 applicant’s amendments to the claim changes the scope. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 2-3 , “In the interest of expediting prosecution, Applicant amends claim 1 to include at least in relevant part the following features: "a drive system that drives at least one of the main body unit and the working device, the drive system including a fuel tank that stores fuel; “a mass body that comprises a shape extending in a plane orthogonal to a vertical direction, wherein the mass body holds at least the fuel tank of the drive system and corrects an unbalanced load acting on the main body unit by driving the working device;" and "a control device that moves the mass body in a predetermined direction along the plane and orthogonal to the vertical direction to an outside of the main body unit to move the fuel tank to the outside of the main body unit when a leakage of the fuel is detected." Support for these amendments can be found in at least par. [0041]-[0042] and FIGS. 1-2. Applicant respectfully asserts that at least the above features are not disclosed by Doi, alone or in combination with Hasegawa.
By way of example, the Office Action states that Doi teaches a counterweight (31), which is allegedly analogous to the mass body as claimed in claim 1. However, as shown in at least FIG. 1 of Doi, Doi appears to disclose that the counterweight (31) extends in a vertical direction and "is provided at the rear end portion of the upper swing body 14... [and] ensures the weight balance required to prevent the machine body 11 from overturning" (par. [0016]).
Conversely, the present application teaches a counter mass (43), whereby the counter mass (43) and what is loaded on the counter mass (43) may serve as a mass body. See, e.g., par. [0043]. Furthermore, the present application discloses that "[a] conventional counter mass is provided along a Z direction, which is a vertical direction, whereas the counter mass 43 of the present embodiment is provided along an X-Y plane orthogonal to the Z direction" (par. [0041]). Based on such a configuration, the mass body may provide a shape suitable for supporting a drive system of the construction machine and may also lower the center of gravity of the construction machine. Furthermore, the control device may thus move the mass body in a predetermined direction along the above-mentioned plane orthogonal to the vertical direction. Applicant notes that the above examples are provided for illustrative purposes and as such, the examples are not intended to limit the claim scope of the present claims to the above examples in any manner. Based on the above, Applicant submits that such a configuration and movement of the mass body is not disclosed by Doi or Hasegawa. As such, the rejection of claim 1 and all dependent claims is believed to be improper.” – AS to Point A Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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.
Applicant argues on page 3 – “Additionally, with respect to the rejection of claims 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, 21, and 22, as such claims ultimately depend on claim 1 and the rejection of claim 1 is believed to be improper based on the foregoing arguments and amendments, the rejection of claims 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, 21, and 22 is also believed to be improper. Moreover, Applicant submits that the Office Action provides no evidence or reasoning as to how or why the addition of the secondary references cited cures the deficiencies of Doi and Hasegawa described above. As such, Applicant requests that the rejection of claims 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, 21, and 22 be withdrawn.” – As to Point B see Point A
Applicant argues on pages 3- , “Claims 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Doi in view of JP Patent Application Publication No. 2020011592 to Miki et al. ("Yoichi"), and in further view of U.S. Patent No. 5,119,059 to Covi et al. ("Covi").
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Doi in view of
Yoichi, in view of Covi, and in further view of TW Patent Application Publication No. M586238 to Zhicheng ("Zhicheng").
To expedite prosecution, Applicant amends claim 11 to include at least in relevant a take- off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part and at which an unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off and landing; “a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power, generated by the fuel, to the power reception device of the unmanned flying object;" and "a shielding portion provided above the revolving part that surrounds at least a part of the power supply or the unmanned flying object, wherein the shielding portion shields electromagnetic noise generated from the power supply." Support for these amendments can be found in at least par. [0038] and FIGS. 1and 3A. Applicant respectfully asserts that at least the above features are not disclosed by Doi, alone or in combination with Yoichi and Covi.
By way of Example, the Office Action concedes on page 9 that Doi fails to teach the following features:
" a take-off and landing portion provided in the main body unit and at which an
unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off
and landing;
e power supply that supplies power, generated by the fuel, to the power reception
device of the unmanned flying object; and
" blocking unit that surrounds at least a part of the power supply or the unmanned
flying object, wherein the blocking unit blocks electromagnetic noise generated from
the power supply.
In an attempt to cure some of the above defects, the Office Action relies on the teachings of Yoichi, alleging that Yoichi discloses a take-off and landing portion which is provided in the main body unit and at which an unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off and landing. The Office Action refers specifically to par. [0002] and [0005] of Yoichi. Applicant respectfully disagrees.
In particular, Applicant submits that Yoichi does not appear to disclose a take-off and
landing portion that is provided on a main body unit of a construction machine. For example, as shown in at least FIG. 2, Yoichi appears to illustrate a take-off and landing section for unmanned flying object on a housing (36) that does not appear to be provided on the working device (12). As such, even if Yoichi and Doi were to be combined, Applicant submits that such a combination would still fail to disclose a take-off and landing portion as claimed, whereby the take-off and landing portion is provided on the main body unit above the revolving part of the main body unit. Moreover, such deficiencies of Yoichi and Doi described above do not appear to be cured by the teachings of Covi. As such, the rejection of claim 11 and all dependent claims is believed to be improper.” - As to point C the examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant asserts that Doi-Hasagawa-Covi does not teach “a take-off and landing portion provided in the main body unit and at which an unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off and landing”. During Patent Examination, pending claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification (see MPEP 2111). The broadest reasonable interpretation of the aforementioned amendment is to have a space in which some unmanned aircraft is able to take off and land from the space that is located above a body of the construction vehicle in which the power to supply to the unmanned vehicle is similarly located above the body of the construction machine. . Yoshinada teaches a helipad for a drone to land upon which is located above the body of the construction machine in which a tethered power supply is connected with the drone and thus the tether is above the main body of the construction machine when the drone is in flight. (as mapped above in claim 11). Therefor the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicants arguments and assert that Yoshinada teaches “a take-off and landing portion provided in the main body unit and at which an unmanned flying object including a power reception device is capable of taking off and landing”. a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part (Pg. 14 - fig. 5.7 & See Also Pg. 12 – fig. 5.6 (equates to a take-off and landing portion provided on the main body unit above the revolving part as the figure 5.7 shows the takeoff portion for the drone and figure 5.6 specifically shows the takeoff portion being above the revolving portion of the construction vehicle )) a power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power (Pg. 31 – “ However, when the tether is used as a power supply, its weight is not negligible” & See Also Pg. 29 - Figure on top of page – (equates to power supply provided above the revolving part that supplies power as the quote shows the tether supplying power to the drone and the figure showing the tether is extending above the revolving portion of the construction machine.) )
Applicant argues on page 4, “Additionally, as claim 23 depends on claim 11, and the rejection of claim 11 is believed to be improper based on the foregoing arguments and amendments, the rejection of 23 is also believed to be improper. Moreover, Applicant submits that the Office Action provides no evidence or reasoning as to how or why the addition of Zhicheng cures the deficiencies of Doi, Yoichi, and Covi described above. As such, Applicant requests that the rejection of claim 23 be withdrawn.” – As to point D see point C
Applicant argues on page 5, “Claims 15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Doi in view of "Dual-Arm Construction Robot with Remote-Control Function" by Yoshinada et al. ("Yoshinada"). Applicant cancels claims 15 and 17-19. As such, Applicant believes that the rejection of claims 15 and 17-19 has been rendered moot.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Doi in view of Yoshinada, as applied above, and in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0288249 to Sasaki et al. ("Sasaki"). Applicant amends claim 16 to depend from claim 1. As such, Applicant submits that the rejection of claim 16 has been rendered moot.
Applicant accordingly requests that the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, 14-19, and 21- 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 be reconsidered and withdrawn.” – As to point E see point A
Applicant argues on page 2, “Applicant adds claims 24 and 25. No new matter is added. Support for claims 24 and 25 is found in at least FIGS. 3A and 3B. Applicant believes that claims 24 and 25 are in condition for allowance based at least on the above arguments and amendments. Accordingly, Applicant kindly requests that appropriate action be taken.” -– As to point F see arguments provided above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20180106016A1. - A management server (32) is provided in a position away from a hydraulic excavator (1). An operator ID and a vehicle body ID and output characteristic information are stored in a memory device (32A) in the management server (32) in such a manner as to be associated with operability desired by each of operators. The management server (32) extracts the output characteristic information in conformity with the operability desired by an operator from the operator ID and the vehicle body ID, and outputs the extracted output characteristic information to the hydraulic excavator (1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REECE ANTHONY WAKELY whose telephone number is (571)272-3783. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am-6:00pm EST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/R.A.W./ Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
3/27/26
Prosecution Insights