DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The amended claims 1 & 8 are referring to a cross-section expansion device “parallel to the control valve device” to increase the flow volume in a hydraulic flow path have no proper support in the filed specification. The filed specification not supporting the amended claims in an understanding manner, in fact it only refers to the term “parallel” once as follow:
“…the cross section expansion is achieved by enabling a bypass line leading from the consumer line to the reservoir. The bypass line is an additional, parallel hydraulic path of the lowering path”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The amended claims 1 & 8 are referring to a cross-section expansion device “parallel to the control valve device” to increase the flow volume in a hydraulic flow path; are vague and indefinite as it is not clear how the “expansion device” would be oriented “parallel to the control valve device” and for what purpose!
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-14 the best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Knechtel, Hans (DE 10 2018 108 946).
Regarding claims 1 and 8: Hans discloses a method and device for controlling a hydraulic hoist unit of a mobile machine to raise and lower a load handling (Fig. 4; via unit 1) wherein the hoist unit a lift cylinder device (via load cylinder device 3) and a control valve device (via 12) which is in communication with a consumer line that leads to the lift cylinder device, see for example (Figs. 1-4; via the shown communication lines between different sections and controller of the system), to a reservoir line that leads to a reservoir and to a delivery line that is connected with a pump an operator the raising and lowering of the hoist unit by manually operating (inherently an operator is initiating the lifting/lowering operations) a hoist unit control element that is linked to the control valve device (via valve device 12), and when there is no load on the load handling during lowering of the hoist unit, the operator, by actuating an authorization actuation element while simultaneously operating manually operable the hoist unit control element authorizes a high-speed lowering (via outflow flow control valve 30 and switching valve 45), during which a lowering flow volume discharged from the hoist unit is increased by a cross section expansion by a cross section expansion device “parallel to the control valve device” in a hydraulic flow path from the hoist unit to the reservoir (via “second switching position 45b deactivates the drain flow control valve, so that in the lowering operation of the lifting cylinder device the “pressure medium flow bypasses the drain flow control valve”).
Regarding claims 2 & 9: the cross-section expansion is achieved by opening a bypass line leading from the consumer line to the reservoir (via “activates the outflow flow control valve (30) arranged in the container line (18)”).
Regarding claims 3 & 10: an electrically actuated hydraulic bypass valve is opened to open the bypass line (via bypasses valve 30 “the pressure medium flow bypasses the drain flow control valve (30)”).
Regarding claims 4 & 11: the cross section expansion is achieved by opening an additional valve in the control valve device (via switching valve 45 and/or valve 60).
Regarding claims 5 & 12: the cross section expansion is achieved by routing a full flow through a lowering proportional throttle valve that carries a partial flow during the lowering of the hoist unit (via valve 60).
Regarding claim 13: for the control of the cross section expansion device, an electronic control device is provided which is linked with the hoist unit control element and the authorization actuation element as well as with the cross section expansion device, see for example (Figs. 1-4; via the shown controlling mechanisms 30 and/or 25).
Regarding claims 6 & 14: load pressure of the hoist unit is measured by a load pressure sensor and the cross section expansion is prevented if the load pressure exceeds a specified value (Fig. 1; via 70/71).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knechtel, Hans (DE 10 2018 108 946).
Regarding claims 7 & 15: Hans does not disclose the use of temperature sensor. However, the Office takes an official notice that a use of temperature sensors is old and well known in the art to be used as a design choice when needed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified Hans’s method/apparatus by the use of temperature sensor, to further gain more control of the hydraulic hoist unit.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As set forth above and after considering the filed amendments and made remarks related to those amendments, the Office believes that the newly added limitations are causing more confusion and rending the claims vague and indefinite. It is not clear how and/or what applicants are referring to by pointing out to the cross-section expansion device being “parallel to the control valve device”?
Further, it appears that applicant’s arguments are more related to a specific arrangement of parts, which is only a matter of re-arrangements of elements. It is noted that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USP 70.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shelle Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights