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 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 16 is 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. Claim 16 recites the limitation "the fluid circuit" in Line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, it is indefinite and unclear as to whether the applicant means for claim 16 to actually depend upon claim 8 OR claim 11 which introduces the “fluid circuit”? Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (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) 1-3, 6, 7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 9,127,442 (Underwood) . Regarding Claims 1-3, 6, 7, and 10 , Underwood teaches: Claim 1 - a grapple assembly (10) for grasping a load (20), the grapple assembly (10) configured to be combined with a prime mover vehicle ( seen in Figure 1 ), said grapple assembly (10) comprising: a first tine (100) operatively combined with a second tine (300); wherein the first tine (100) is configured to rotate around a first axis of rotation relative to the second tine (300) between a first position and a second position; wherein the second tine (300) is configured to rotate around a second axis of rotation relative to the first tine (100) between an open position and a closed position; and a force limiting device ( 110 ) having a first portion operatively combined with the first tine (100) , the force limiting device (110) having a relief valve ( described in at least Column 6, Lines 25-41 ) configured to selectively allow movement of the force limiting device (110) from an operational position to a tripped position; wherein the force limiting device (110) is configured to allow movement of the first tine (100) from the first position to the second position when the force limiting device (110) moves from the operational position to the tripped position , ( Figures 1-6 ); Claim 2 - wherein the relief valve has an open position and a closed position and is biased in the closed position, the relief valve configured to move from the closed position to the open position when a predetermined amount of pressure is applied to the force limiting device ( described in at least Column 6, Lines 25-41 ; force limiting device (110) collapses when pressure exceeds a limit/threshold ) ; Claim 3 - an intermediate member (200) , the first tine (100) is pivotally combined with the intermediate member (200) at a first point defining the first axis of rotation, the second tine (300) is pivotally combined with the intermediate member (200) at a second point defining the second axis of rotation, wherein the force limiting device (110) has a second portion operatively combined with the intermediate member (200), (Figures 1-6); Claim 6 – wherein there is a first angle between the first tine (100) and the intermediate member (200) in the first position and a second angle between the first tine (100) and the intermediate member (200) in the second position, and the second angle is greater than the first angle ( described in at least Column 6, Lines 25-41 ; force limiting device (110) collapses when pressure exceeds a limit/threshold and thus would increase the angle between the first tine (100) and the intermediate member (200) ), (Figures 1-6); Claim 7 – wherein there is a first distance between the first tine (100) and the second tine (300) in the open position and a second distance between the first tine (100) and the second tine (300) in the closed position, and the second distance is greater than the first distance ( described in at least Column 6, Lines 25-41 ; force limiting device (110) collapses when pressure exceeds a limit/threshold and thus would increase the angle between the first tine (100) and the intermediate member (200) ), (Figures 1-6); Claim 10 - wherein the force limiting device (110) is a force limiting cylinder (110), (Figures 1-6). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . Claim(s) 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 9,127,442 (Underwood) in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,313,633 ( Muntjanoff et al.) . Regarding Claims 4, and 5 , Underwood teaches the grapple assembly as described above, but does not teach: a biasing member configured to bias the force limiting device in the operational position ( Claim 4 ); and wherein the force limiting device further comprises a piston assembly having a piston, a first rod portion on one side of the piston, and a second rod portion on another side of the piston, and wherein the biasing member is a spring positioned around the second rod portion ( Claim 5 ). However, Muntjanoff et al. teaches: Claims 4 and 5 – a grapple assembly including a force limiting device (12) including a pressure relief valve (120), and a biasing member (66) configured to bias the force limiting device (12) in the operational position , and wherein the force limiting device (12) further comprises a piston assembly having a piston (52) , a first rod portion (40) on one side of the piston (52) , and a second rod portion (62) on another side of the piston, and wherein the biasing member (66) is a spring (66) positioned around the second rod portion (62), (Figures 1 and 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the grapple assembly of Underwood to have a biasing member configured to bias the force limiting device in the operational position ( Claim 4 ); and wherein the force limiting device further comprises a piston assembly having a piston, a first rod portion on one side of the piston, and a second rod portion on another side of the piston, and wherein the biasing member is a spring positioned around the second rod portion ( Claim 5 ) as taught by Muntjanoff et al. for the purposes of keeping the force limiting device urged to be in the operational position. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 11- 15, and 17- 21 are allowed. Claim 16 ( assumed to depend upon one of claim 11-15 and 17 ) would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Josh Rodden whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (303) 297-4258 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F, 8-5 MST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Michener can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 27 2 - 1467 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JOSHUA E RODDEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642