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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-7, and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nishi (US 12624531).
With regards to claim1, Nishi discloses a control system (controller 30 with automatic control part 54) for a loading machine, the loading machine including a swing body (upper traveling body 3) configured to swing about a swing center (swing mechanism 2), a support part (lower traveling body 1) supporting the swing body, and work equipment (boom 4 with arm 5) having a bucket (6) and attached to the swing body, wherein the swing body is configured to swing relative to the support part (Col. 2, L34-40), the control system comprising: at least one memory storing instructions (Col. 5, L47-48); and at least one processor (Col. 5, L44-47) configured to execute the instructions, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive an input of a manual operation signal for at least one of the swing body or the work equipment based on an operation of an operation device (26) configured to operate the swing body and the work equipment (Col. 5, L4-8), generate an automatic operation signal for driving at least one of the swing body or the work equipment, determine to output the manual operation signal for any of the swing body or the work equipment for which the input of the manual operation signal is provided (Col. 5, L10-12), and the automatic operation signal for any of the swing body or the work equipment for which there no input of the manual operation signal is provided (Col. 5, L10-12), on the basis of the input manual operation signal, and output the manual operation signal or the automatic operation signal for each of the swing body and the work equipment based on a result of the determination (Col. 5, L13-15).
With regards to claim 2, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Nishi further discloses wherein the work equipment is provided with a plurality of link parts (boom 4 with arm 5) including the bucket, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: based on the result of the determination indicates that the manual operation signal is output for at least one link part among the plurality of link parts, generate the automatic operation signal for another link part, which is other than the at least one link part, among the plurality of link parts such that an operation amount thereof approaches an operation amount of the manual operation signal related to the another link part (Col. 12, L20-25).
With regards to claim 5, Nishi discloses a control method for a loading machine, the loading machine including a swing body (upper traveling body 3) configured to swing about a swing center (swing mechanism 2), a support part (lower traveling body 1) supporting the swing body, and work equipment (arm 5, boom 4) having a bucket (6) and attached to the swing body, wherein the swing body is configured to swing relative to the support part, the control method comprising: receiving an input of a manual operation signal for at least one of the swing body or the work equipment based on an operation of an operation device (26) configured to operate the swing body and the work equipment (Col. 5, L4-8); generating an automatic operation signal for driving at least one of the swing body or the work equipment; determining to output the manual operation signal for any of the swing body or the work equipment for which the input of the manual operation signal is provided (Col. 5, L10-12), and the automatic operation signal for any of the swing body or the work equipment thereof for which there has been no input of the manual operation signal is provided; and outputting the manual operation signal or the automatic operation signal for each of the swing body and the work equipment on based on a result of the determination (Col. 5, L13-15).
With regards to claim 6, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Nishi further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: set an automatic operation flag for each of a plurality of controlled objects including the swing body and the work equipment (via MC switch); and determine to output (i) the automatic operation signal for a controlled object, among the plurality of controlled objects, having the automatic operation flag set to ON, and (ii) the manual operation signal for a controlled object, among the plurality of controlled objects, having the automatic operation flag set to OFF (Col. 12, L26-32).
With regards to claim 7, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 6 as outlined above. Nishi further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the automatic operation flag for each of the controlled objects being OFF, terminate an automatic loading control of the loading machine (Col. 12, L8-13; Automatic control only happens if switch is pressed).
With regards to claim 10, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Nishi further discloses wherein the loading machine is a face excavator (Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 11, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 2 as outlined above. Nishi further discloses wherein the plurality of link parts include a boom (4), an arm (5), and the bucket.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 3 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishi,
With regards to claim 3, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Nishi does not directly disclose wherein the output determination unit determines to output the automatic operation signal for any of the swing body and the work equipment in which the operation amount of the manual operation signal is less than an operation amount of the automatic operation signal. However, this would be obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order for the work equipment to function.
With regards to claim 8, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Nishi does not directly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: determine whether the manual operation signal indicates an operation resisting the automatic operation signal for each of a plurality of controlled objects including the swing body and the work equipment; and based on a determination that the manual operation signal indicates the operation resisting the automatic operation signal, output the manual operation signal.
However, the examiner takes Official Notice that this is known in the art and therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to avoid damaging the components by having two opposing instructions.
With regards to claim 9, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 6 as outlined above. Nishi does not directly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: determine whether the manual operation signal indicates an operation resisting the automatic operation signal; and based on a determination that the manual operation signal indicates the operation resisting the automatic operation signal, set the automatic operation flag to OFF.
However, the examiner takes Official Notice that this is known in the art and therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to avoid damaging the components by having two opposing instructions.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Friend et al. (US 20170191246), hereafter Friend.
With regards to claim 4, Nishi discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Nishi does not disclose an avoidance angle specifying unit configured to specify an interference avoidance angle, which is a swing angle of the swing body at which the bucket and a loading target do not overlap in a plan view from above, during an automatic control of moving the bucket from above the loading target to an excavation start point, wherein the operation signal output unit outputs the automatic operation signal for the work equipment regardless of the manual operation signal until the swing angle of the swing body reaches the interference avoidance angle.
However, Friend discloses avoiding collision between an excavation machine and a target (P0046). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to prevent collision as disclosed by Friend in order to avoid damaging the loading machine (MPEP 2143.I.D).
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments are rendered moot. New grounds of rejection are presented above.
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 JESSICA LYNN BURKMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5824. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am to 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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571)272-7805. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.L.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights