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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “movable stroke” of claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-10 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.
Claim 1 recites “a rack having a movable stroke”, “a position adjusting mechanism having a movable stroke”, and “wherein the position adjusting mechanism comprises a main hydraulic cylinder and an auxiliary hydraulic cylinder”. The underlined portions both recite the limitation of “a movable stroke”. Thus, it is unclear whether both limitations refer to the same feature or each of the rack and position adjusting mechanism has their respective movable stroke. In addition, the position adjusting mechanism comprises hydraulic cylinders. Is the movable stroke and the hydraulic cylinders the same feature? Based on [0043] of the Specification and FIG. 1, it appears that movable stroke of the rack and position adjusting mechanism refer to the hydraulic cylinders 3 and 6. To further prosecution, the Examiner will examine the claims as such.
Claims 2-10 are dependent claims of claim 1 and thus, inherit the indefiniteness of claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by An et al. (CN 108532654 A; see machine translation; hereinafter An).
With regards to claim 1, An discloses a movable foundation static load test apparatus, comprising:
a rack (including 2, 3-3, 3-4, 4 and 5; FIG. 9) having a movable stroke (3 and 8; [0066, 0069]; FIG. 3-5) moving along a vertical direction and configured to place a balancing weight (10; [0066]; FIG. 1);
a crawler traveling mechanism (including 1) comprising a frame (1-3) fixedly connected with the rack (including 2, 3-3, 3-4, 4 and 5; [0066-0067]; FIG. 9), and configured to drive the rack to travel ([0067, 0069]); and
a position adjusting mechanism (3 and 8) having a movable stroke (3 and 8) moving along the vertical direction and configured to adjust a distance between the rack and a test object ([0069]),
wherein the position adjusting mechanism (3 and 8) comprises a main hydraulic cylinder (8) and an auxiliary hydraulic cylinder (3; FIG. 3-5), the main hydraulic cylinder (8) is fixedly connected with the rack (including 2, 3-3, 3-4, 4 and 5; [0066]; FIG. 2 and 9), and the auxiliary hydraulic cylinder (3) is disposed below the main hydraulic cylinder (FIG. 3).
With regards to claim 2, An discloses the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a first mounting groove and a second mounting groove are formed at a front end and a rear end of the frame (1-3) respectively (FIG. 8);
the crawler traveling mechanism further comprises:
a crawler sleeving (1-5) outside the frame (FIG. 8);
a driving wheel (1-4) mounted in the first mounting groove and configured to drive the crawler to rotate ([0067]; FIG. 8);
a guide wheel (one of 1-2) mounted in the second mounting groove and configured to guide an advancing direction of the crawler ([0067]; FIG. 8); and
a driving apparatus (1-1) configured to drive the driving wheel to rotate ([0067]).
With regards to claim 3, An discloses the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the crawler traveling mechanism further comprises a thrust wheel (another one of 1-2), and the thrust wheel is disposed between a lower surface of the frame (1-3) and the crawler and is configured to support a weight of the apparatus ([0067]); and/or
the crawler traveling mechanism further comprises thrust wheels (another one of 1-2), and a plurality of thrust wheels are available ([0067], FIG. 8).
With regards to claim 4, An discloses the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the crawler traveling mechanism further comprises a supporting chain wheel, and the supporting chain wheel is disposed between an upper surface of the frame and the crawler and is configured to support the crawler; and/or
the crawler traveling mechanism further comprises supporting chain wheels, and a plurality of supporting chain wheels are available (1-5; [0067]; FIG. 7-8).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (CN 108532654 A; see machine translation; hereinafter An) in view of Iwasaki et al. (US Publication 2017/0106923 A1; hereinafter Iwasaki).
With regards to claim 5, An teaches the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 2. However, An is silent regarding wherein the crawler comprises a metal crawler or a rubber crawler.
Iwasaki teaches a crawler (abstract; FIG. 1-2) comprises a rubber crawler ([0045-0046]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilized the rubber crawler as taught by Iwasaki as the material for the track of An with reasonable expectation of moving the apparatus as originally intended.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (CN 108532654 A; see machine translation; hereinafter An) in view of Mietschnig (US Publication 2018/0029852 A1).
With regards to claim 6, An teaches the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 1. However, An is silent regarding the apparatus further comprising a base and a lifting apparatus, wherein the base is disposed below the rack, the lifting apparatus comprises a driving part and a movable part, the driving part is fixedly connected with the rack, and the movable part may move along the vertical direction, is hinged with the base, and is configured to upwards lift the rack and the crawler traveling mechanism.
Mietschnig teaches a movable foundation static load test apparatus comprising a base (10) and a lifting apparatus (7, 8), wherein the base is disposed below the rack (2; FIG. 8-10), the lifting apparatus comprises a driving part (7) and a movable part (8), the driving part is fixedly connected with the rack ([0057]; FIG. 10-13), and the movable part (8) may move along the vertical direction (FIG. 11; [0053]), is hinged with the base (FIG. 10-13), and is configured to upwards lift the rack and the crawler traveling mechanism.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the base and lifting apparatus as taught by Mietschnig to the apparatus as taught by An with reasonable expectation of reducing ground pressure due to the crawlers ([0017-0019]; Mietschnig). The combination of An and Mietschnig would teach the apparatus is configured to upwards lift the rack and the crawler traveling mechanism (FIG. 5; An).
With regards to claim 7, An, as combined with Mietschnig, teaches (citations to Mietschnig unless specified otherwise) the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 6, wherein two bases (10; FIG. 8-10) are available, the two bases (10) are respectively disposed below a front end and a rear end of the rack (FIG. 8), and each base is provided with two ball head hinged supports (FIG. 11-12);
four lifting apparatuses (8; FIG. 8) are available, and movable parts of the four lifting apparatuses are respectively hinged with the four ball head hinged supports (FIG. 8-12).
With regards to claim 8, An, as combined with Mietschnig, teaches (citations to An unless specified otherwise) the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 6, wherein a first
through hole is formed in the rack (including 2, 3-3, 3-4, 4 and 5), and the main hydraulic cylinder (8) penetrates through the first through hole and is fixedly connected with the rack (see FIG. 3-5); and/or
a second through hole is formed in the rack, and a driving part of the lifting apparatus
penetrates through the second through hole and is fixedly connected with the rack.
With regards to claim 9, An, as combined with Mietschnig, teaches (citations to An unless specified otherwise) the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the rack (including 2, 3-3, 3-4, 4 and 5) comprises:
two cross beams (including 3-3 and 4), second through holes being formed at two ends of each cross beam (through holes formed at 3-3 for 3-1; FIG. 11);
two longitudinal beams (2) respectively disposed at front and rear ends of the two cross beams and configured to connect the two cross beams (FIG. 9); and
a rack main body (middle two 5; FIG. 11) disposed in a middle of the two cross beams and provided with a first through hole (at 8), and the frame being fixedly connected with the rack main body (FIG. 4);
wherein both the two longitudinal beams and the rack main body are welded with the two
cross beams (it is inherent that the beams are welded together for heavy duty equipment such as those of An).
With regards to claim 10, An, as combined with Mietschnig, teaches (citations to An unless specified otherwise) the movable foundation static load test apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the rack further comprises a plurality of strengthening beams (5 located on each end of 4; FIG. 11), and the plurality of strengthening beams are disposed in parallel with the longitudinal beams, and are welded with the two cross beams (it is inherent that the beams are welded together for heavy duty equipment such as those of An).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANG X.L NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1585. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-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, STEPHEN D. MEIER can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/QXN/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853