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
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on November 10, 2025. Claims 1-14 are pending.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
In respond to applicant's arguments based on the filed amendment with respect to 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections of said previous office action have been fully considered; however, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 and 14 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 claim limitation of “the run-through ability of a movable body being an ability of the movable body to run through an uneven road without getting stuck” appears to be indefinite since the Examiner is unclear of what is considered to be “an ability…to run through an uneven road without getting stuck”.
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-12, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jinno et al. US2016/0258118 (“Jinno”) in view of Ikari US2015/0032373 (“Ikari”).
Regarding claim(s) 1, 14. Jinno discloses a management system configured to manage a plurality of movable bodies that travels a travel region (FIG. 1 shows a management system for a haulage vehicle according to an exemplary embodiment of the invention.), comprising
a work plan generating device configured to generate a work plan of the plurality of movable bodies based on a run-through ability of each of the plurality of movable bodies (para. 54-57, The management system 1, which is configured to manage a dump truck 20 (a haulage vehicle) used in a mine or the like, includes: a wireless communication equipment 3 that collects operation information of the dump truck 20 through wireless communication in the mine; and road surface condition output equipment 10 capable of communicating with the wireless communication equipment 3.) and
a road surface condition that is a condition of a road surface of the travel region (para. 60, The management system 1 for the dump truck 20 (the haulage vehicle) includes the road surface condition output equipment 10 that collects and outputs information of a determination result of a road surface condition determined on the side of the dump truck 20. The road surface condition output equipment 10, for instance, outputs the determination result of the road surface condition of the route R, for instance, in the form of map data showing the determination result superimposed on a map of the route R and/or in the form of a report chronologically listing the determination result per traveling the route R back and forth along with the number of times of traveling.).
Jinno is silent to the run-through ability of a movable body being an ability of the movable body to run through an uneven road without getting stuck.
Ikari teaches the run-through ability of a movable body being an ability of the movable body to run through an uneven road without getting stuck (para. 9, 32-34, The map storage device 22 stores the map data received from the management station 3. The display control device 23 makes the indicator 17A display the map stored in the map storage device 22, the current position of the dump truck 2, and other data stored in the information storage device 21 (e.g., current traveling speed, live load, vehicle body tilting angle, etc.).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method of Jinno by incorporating the applied teaching of Ikari above to improve vehicle operational status when driven on an uneven/unpaved road and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim(s) 2. Jinno discloses wherein the work plan generating device determines a traveling order of the plurality of movable bodies such that the run-through ability of each of the movable bodies is higher than the run-through ability required based on the road surface condition (para. 80, The road surface condition determining device 30 acquires the speed TM of the transmission output shaft or the speed TM of the wheels 23 from the rotation sensor 25.).
Regarding claim(s) 3. Jinno discloses wherein the work plan generating device determines a traveling order of the plurality of movable bodies in a state in which a margin of the run-through ability of each of the movable bodies with respect to the run-through ability required based on the road surface condition is smaller than a set margin (para. 19-25, the road surface condition determining method further include: detecting position information of the haulage vehicle during the travel of the haulage vehicle; and associating a determination result of the road surface condition with the position information. ).
Regarding claim(s) 4. Jinno discloses wherein the plurality of movable bodies includes a first movable body and a second movable body whose weight is greater than the first movable body, and wherein the work plan generating device determines a traveling order of the plurality of movable bodies in a state in which the first movable body travels so as to precede the second movable body (para. 91, the road surface condition determining unit 302; and stores data obtained by processing the operation information in the in-vehicle memory 31. Specifically, the road surface condition determining device 30 stores the operation information obtained during the back and forth travel of the dump truck 20 along the outgoing route Rg from the dump site DP (the start of the route) to the loading site LP and along the return route Rr from the loading site LP to the dump site DP (the end of the route) as a cycle data set.).
Regarding claim(s) 5. Jinno discloses wherein the work plan generating device generates the work plan such that a repair of the road surface is performed when it is estimated that at least one of the plurality of movable bodies is incapable of running through the travel region before a work of a predetermined work amount is completed (para. 124, ] In the loaded state, the load amount is substantially the same as the rated load amount. Specifically, the load amount is not less than a second preset value but not more than a third present value. In the exemplary embodiment, the second present value is set at 90% and the third preset value is set at 110%, so that the road surface condition determining device 30 determines that the dump truck 20 is in the loaded state when the load amount falls within a range from 90% to 110%.).
Regarding claim(s) 6. Jinno discloses wherein the work plan generating device generates the work plan such that a repair of the road surface is performed when it is required that the predetermined number or more of the movable bodies travel in a set time before a work of a predetermined work amount is completed (para. 77, the arithmetic unit 301 calculates a maximum amplitude and a frequency of a detection value of the suspension pressure in a predetermined period of time, and the road surface condition determining unit 302 determines the road surface condition based on the maximum amplitude and the frequency. Specific operation of each of the arithmetic unit 301 and the road surface condition determining unit 302 will be described later.).
Regarding claim(s) 7, 8. Jinno does not explicitly disclose wherein the work plan generating device obtains the road surface condition of the travel region by cumulating damage to the road surface caused by traveling of each of the movable bodies.
Ikari teaches another road surface management system and method that obtains the road surface condition of the travel region by cumulating damage to the road surface caused by traveling of each of the movable bodies (para. 5-10, A control unit of the management station receives the road surface irregularity position information and the traveling path information from the dump trucks and generates repair map data, indicating the positions of the traveling lanes (road surfaces) needing repair, based on the received information. Then, the control unit of the management station transmits the generated repair map data to road repair vehicles (e.g., motor graders). A control unit installed in each road repair vehicle receives the repair map data from the management station and displays the repair map data on an indicator. Consequently, the drivers of the road repair vehicles can drive the road repair vehicles to the positions needing repair displayed on the indicators and carry out the repair work at the positions.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method of Jinno by incorporating the applied teaching of Ikari to ensured proper maintenance of road surface condition and reduce vehicle travel safety.
Regarding claim(s) 9. Jinno discloses wherein the run-through ability of each of the movable bodies is determined to be a smaller value when an event occurs than when the event does not occur (FIG. 3 is a functional block diagram showing the road surface condition determining device 30 and peripherals thereof. The dump truck 20 is connected to the road surface condition determining device 30, an in-vehicle memory 31, the in-vehicle wireless communication device 27 and the position information detector 29. Further, the road surface condition determining device 30 is connected to a condition acquiring unit 32.).
Regarding claim(s) 12. Jinno discloses wherein the work plan generating device generates the work plan so as to limit traveling of the movable body having a weight greater than a weight threshold until a set time elapses after occurrence of an event (para. 67, The wheels 23, each of which includes a tire and a wheel body, are attached to the vehicle body 21 and driven with a power transmitted from the vehicle body 21 as described above. The suspension cylinder 24 is disposed between each of the wheels 23 and the vehicle body 21. A load corresponding to the weights of the vehicle body 21, the vessel 22 and the load substance loaded in the vessel 22 acts on each of the wheels 23 via the suspension cylinder 24.).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jinno et al. US2016/0258118 (“Jinno”) in view of Ikari US2015/0032373 (“Ikari”) further in view of Kawamata et al. US2016/0019792 (“Kawamata”).
Regarding claim(s) 10, 11. Jinno in view of Ikari does not explicitly disclose wherein the event is one of rainfall, snowfall, and water sprinkling.
Kawamata teaches another fleet management system and method that determines an wherein the event is one of rainfall, snowfall, and water sprinkling (para. 14, , dump trucks such as mining dump trucks do not mainly travel on roads having substantially uniform surface resistance (e.g., paved roads). On the roads where such dump trucks travel, the surface resistance tends to change greatly due to variations in weather (e.g., rain), water sprinkling by sprinkler trucks, temperature change at an oil sand mining site, etc.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Jinno in view of Ikari with Kawamata’s teaching above to improve the vehicle controls. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is 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.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUC M DO whose telephone number is (571)270-5962. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramón Mercado, Ph.D. can be reached on (571) 270-5744. 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.
/TRUC M DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658