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 .
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.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application (DE 10 2022 134 329.4) filed in Germany on 12/21/2022.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8-12 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ikeda Yuichi (JP 2014074297), herein referred to as Yuichi.
Regarding Claim 1: Yuichi teaches an apparatus for determining the position of a vibration unit for concrete compaction which can be guided by an operator (see paragraph 0043 and Fig. 2), the apparatus comprising:
a surface position determination device (35), a total station (34-electronic distance meter) as a position detecting device (see paragraph 0018) designed to determine a position of the receiving device (39-communication device) in a plane (see Figs. 7 & 8);
an orientation determination device (see paragraph 0045, 30-inclinometers) for determining an orientation of a working direction of the operator; and
a correction device (see paragraph 0048) that comprises of three or more (34-total stations) that can be configured to obtain and correct the position of the receiving device (35) in the concrete placing area (23) in real time (see paragraph 0041) in order to obtain the correct position of the vibrator (25) while immersed in the concrete (24).
Regarding Claim 2: Yuichi further teaches that the receiving device (35) is designed to be carried by the operator (in so far as the compaction device is configured to be carried by a user during placement and removal from the concrete absent a more specific recitation of the structure of nature of design as it relates to a user carrying)
Regarding Claim 9: Yuichi teaches (see Figs. 1, 2, 7 & 8 and paragraphs 0024, 48) an assistance system comprising: - a planning apparatus (20) that is configured to store planning data in working area (381), wherein the planning data is used to define locations (44) in a defined region (23) at which concrete compaction with the concrete compaction apparatus is to be carried out; - a position determination apparatus (29 & 34) that is configured to determine a respective current position of the concrete compaction apparatus, the position determination apparatus including + a receiving device (39), + an orientation determination device (30) for determining an orientation of a working direction of an operator, and + a correction device (34) that is configured to be configured to obtain the correct the position of the receiving device (35) in the concrete placing area (23); and - a display device (37 & 40) for displaying at least the respective location at which concrete compaction currently is to be carried out.
Regarding Claim 10: Yuichi teaches the apparatus of claim 9 above. Yuichi further teaches (see Figs. 2 & 8) the display device (37 & 40) which displays the position of the concrete compaction apparatus and the order (see paragraphs 0010, 30, 31 & 32) of locations (44) at which concrete compaction is to be carried out next in the concrete body (23).
Regarding Claim 11: Yuichi teaches the apparatus of claim 9 above. Yuichi further teaches (see Figs. 2 & 8) a display device (37 & 40) which displays the position of the concrete compaction apparatus and the order (see paragraphs 0010, 30, 31 & 32) of locations (44) at which concrete compaction is to be carried out next in the concrete body (23).
Regarding Claim 12: Yuichi teaches the apparatus of claim 9 above. Yuichi further teaches (see paragraph 0029) wherein a compaction coordinate specification apparatus (27) is provided for the purpose of generating planning data that can be stored in the planning apparatus (381).
Regarding Claim 14: Yuichi teaches (see Fig. 3) a method for determining the position of a vibration unit for concrete compaction (25) which can be guided by an operator, the method comprising: determining a position of a receiving device arranged on an operator in the plane; determining an orientation of a working direction of the operator; correcting the position of the receiving device with an offset in a direction of the orientation of the working direction and, thus, determining the position of a vibration unit in the plane; and determining a position of the vibration unit in terms of depth, starting from the position of the vibration unit in the plane or from the position of the receiving device in the plane (see paragraphs 0008, 0009, Fig. 3).
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuichi as applied to Claim 1 above and in further view of Patrick D. Gallagher et al. (US 2022/0341198) herein referred to as Gallagher.
Regarding Claim 3: Yuichi teaches the apparatus of claim 1 above. Yuichi fails to teach wherein the surface position determination device has at least one positioning system selected from the group consisting of RTK (Real Time Kinematic), DGPS (Differential Global Positioning System), UWB (Ultra-wideband), Bluetooth radio devices, and optical systems with image recognition.
However, Gallagher does teach (see paragraph 0039) a concrete vibrator apparatus wherein a standard Bluetooth device is utilized to allow the remote-control unit (102) to wirelessly communicate with the concrete vibrator (10) wherein the remote-control unit (102) may include a transmitter (126) configured to send messages to a receiver (130) on the concrete vibrator (10) as depicted in (Fig. 6).
It would be obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art and prior to the effective date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Bluetooth device of Gallagher to the apparatus of Yuichi to allow the benefit of untethered wireless communication between the orientation determination device (30) and the receiving device (35).
Claims 4 & 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuichi as applied to Claim 1 above and in further view of Wan-tao Chen (CN 203113804) herein referred to as Chen.
Regarding Claim 4: Yuichi teaches the apparatus of claim 1 above. Yuichi fails to teach wherein the orientation determination device has a device selected from the group consisting of a north-seeking device, an electronic compass, a magnetometer, a rotational acceleration measurement device, a gyroscope, and an inertial measurement unit (IMU).
However, Chen does teach (see paragraph 0026) a concrete tamping machine wherein the Central Processing Unit (CPU) is connected to a gyroscope in the form of a level sensing device to obtain the angle of the vibratory rod and the vertical direction.
It would be obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art and prior to the effective date of the claimed invention to incorporate the gyroscope device of Chen to the apparatus of Yuichi to allow Yuichi to ascertain the angle of the vibratory rod and the vertical direction, which would allow the operator to provide a more realized result of compacting the concrete.
Regarding Claim 5: Yuichi teaches the apparatus of claim 1 above. Yuichi fails to teach wherein a depth position determination device is configured to determine a position of the vibration unit in terms of depth.
However, Chen does teach (see paragraph 0026) a utility model for a concrete vibrating and compacting machine that detects the insertion depth of the vibrating arm by use of a central processing unit (CPU), wherein the CPU is connected with a gyroscope in the form of a level sensing device and a ultrasonic wave distance measuring module, to obtain the inserting depth of the concrete surface.
It would be obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art and prior to the effective date of the claimed invention to incorporate the depth determination device of Chen to the apparatus of Yuichi to allow remote measurement of the depth penetration of the concrete body. This would provide the benefit to make certain no areas of the intended body of concrete to be compacted have been omitted.
Regarding Claim 8: Yuichi in view of Chen teaches the limitations of Claim 5 as discussed above. Additionally, Yuichi further discloses (see Figs. 7 & 8 and paragraph 0026) a documentation apparatus comprising a control unit (26), a working unit (381) to store the data, a display device (37 & 40) wherein documentation of the status of the vibrating task is shown in front and plan elevations of the grid (44) that is the concrete body to be vibrated.
Claims 6 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuichi in view of Chen as applied to Claim 5 above and in further view of Takeshi Miyamoto (JP 2024026918) herein referred to as Miyamoto.
Regarding Claim 6: Yuichi in view of Chen teaches the apparatus of claim 5 above. However, Yuichi and Chen fail to teach a depth position determination device has a distance measurement device that is configured to measure a distance between the vibration unit and the receiving device of the surface position determination device.
However, Miyamoto does teach (see paragraph 0022) wherein the position measurement unit (12) measures the position of the first antenna (11) which is moveable with the concrete vibration unit, based on the radio signal transmitted and received between the first and second antennas (11 & 21) and the known position of the second antenna (21). Miyamoto further teaches, in order to measure the position of the first antenna (11), there are methods of measuring the position based on the distance between the first antenna (11) and the second antenna (21) and a method of measuring the position based on the distance between the first antenna (11) and the second antenna (21) and the angle with respect to the second antenna (21).
It would be obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art and prior to the effective date of the claimed invention to incorporate the depth determination device of Miyamoto to the apparatus of Yuichi. This modification to Yuichi would provide the operator the benefit of knowing the distance to the vibrating unit during the compaction phase in real time.
Regarding Claim 7: Yuichi in view of Chen teaches the apparatus of claim 5 above. However, Yuichi and Chen fail to teach wherein the distance measurement device is configured to determine the distance on the basis of an attenuation of a radio signal which is exchanged between the vibration unit and the receiving device of the surface position determination device.
However, Miyamoto does teach (see paragraph 0024) wherein the first (11) & second (21) antennas can identify the antenna that has transmitted the received radio wave from the identification information included in the received radio wave. In addition, the first (11) & second (21) antennas can confirm the distance to the antenna that has transmitted the received radio wave from the intensity of the received radio wave. Accordingly, the first antenna (11) can obtain the distance li between the first antenna (11) and the second antenna (21) based on the radio waves received from the plurality of second antennas (21).
It would be obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art and prior to the effective date of the claimed invention to incorporate the radio wave distance determination system of Miyamoto to the apparatus of Yuichi. The identified distance between the first (11) & subsequent array of second (21) antennas would provide the operator the benefit real time location of the vibrating unit.
Claims 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuichi and in further view of Herbert Dreyer (U.S. 3,061,278) herein referred to as Dreyer.
Regarding Claim 13: Yuichi teaches a concrete compaction apparatus comprising: an internal vibrator, wherein the internal vibrator has: a vibration unit for (32) generating a vibration for concrete compaction; an (paragraph 0031) operating unit (28); a total station (34-electronic distance meter) as a position determining apparatus (see paragraph 0018) designed to determine a position of the receiving device (39-communication device) in a plane (see Figs. 7 & 8); an orientation determination device (see paragraph 0045, 30-inclinometers) for determining an orientation of a working direction of the operator; and a correction device (see paragraph 0048) that comprises of three or more (34-total stations) can be configured to obtain the correct the position of the receiving device (35) in the concrete placing area (23) in real time (see paragraph 0041) in order to obtain the correct position of the vibrator (25) while immersed in the concrete (24).
Yuichi does not teach a protective and operating hose connecting the vibration unit (32) and the operating unit (28).
However, Dreyer does teach a concrete vibrating apparatus (see Fig. 1) that has an operating hose (23) that connects the vibrator unit (13) on one end to a control switch (15) on the other end, that is activated by the operator.
It would be obvious for an ordinary person skilled in the art and prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to, relocate the vibrator mounted operating switch (28) of Yuichi to a position further up on the hose to better protect the switch from concrete splatter and also from constant vibration of the vibrator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KALPIT C. PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-3053. The examiner can normally be reached 7.30am to 5pm.
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at (571) 272-0547. 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.
/KALPIT CHANDRAKANT PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights