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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the amendment filed on April 13, 2026. Claims 1-3, 8, 12, 17, 20, and 21 are amended. Claim 6 is cancelled. Claims 1-5, 7-12, and 17-23 are pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McLaughlin (CA 3054501), and further in view of Fitz et al (U.S. Patent No.: 5,177,516).
Regarding claim 1:
McLaughlin discloses a mobile camera crane unit (FIGS. 1-7), comprising: a mobile base having wheels ((16), [0012]) mounted on a chassis ((12), [0012]); a deck on the chassis ([0015]); rails ((30), [0015]) attached to the deck ([0015]); a plate ((50), [0018]; “…camera mount 50 has an attachment 58…”, [0019]) slidably positioned on the rails (“Track 30 is a linear track that…defines a linear path along which a mobile camera mount 50 is able to move…”, [0015]; “…mobile camera mount…50, has a mounting platform 52 that engages the flanges 36 of track 30 via a plurality of mount wheels 54 that allow camera mount 50 to move freely along track 30…”, [0018]); a camera crane (FIGS. 2, 3) having a column ((58), [0019]) on the plate ([0019]); a crane arm (FIGS. 2, 3, (66), [0019]) pivotally attached to the column ([0019]), a front end of the crane arm configured to attach to a camera head or a camera platform ((64), [0019]); levelling rods on the plate, the levelling rods pivotally attached to the column for levelling the column (indicated below, FIGS. 1-3, 6);
PNG
media_image1.png
638
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a drive system configured to move the column linearly on the chassis (“Track 30 is a linear track that…defines a linear path along which a mobile camera mount 50 is able to move…”, [0015]; “…mobile camera mount…50, has a mounting platform 52 that engages the flanges 36 of track 30 via a plurality of mount wheels 54 that allow camera mount 50 to move freely along track 30…”, [0018]; “…camera mount 50 has an attachment 58…”, [0019]).
McLaughlin does not specifically disclose: a back end of the crane arm pivotable to a position below the deck.
Fitz teaches a camera crane, wherein a back end of the crane arm is pivotable to a position below the deck (FIGS. 1, 2, wherein (6) is fixed to (24) and is part of the crane arm, C. 3 L. 37-54).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the feature of Fitz’s with the mobile camera crane unit taught by McLaughlin for the purpose of lengthening the boom arm with relative ease and speed to increase the lift of the camera platform (Fitz: C. 1 L. 53-58).
Regarding claim 7:
McLaughlin and Fitz disclose and teach of the mobile camera crane unit of claim 1 wherein McLaughlin further discloses that the column is supported on rollers engaged with a track on the chassis (“…camera mount 50 has an attachment 58…”, [0019]; “…mobile camera mount…50, has a mounting platform 52 that engages the flanges 36 of track 30 via a plurality of mount wheels 54 that allow camera mount 50 to move freely along track 30…”, [0018]).
Regarding claim 12:
McLaughlin and Fitz disclose and teach of the mobile camera crane unit of claim 1 wherein McLaughlin further discloses that the camera crane includes the crane arm pivotally mounted on a U-shaped upright (indicated below) by a pivot axle (indicated below) to allow the crane arm to tilt up and down (FIGS. 2, 3, [0019]), and the U-shaped upright is rotatably mounted on the column to allow the crane arm to pan horizontally (“Jib 66 may also be rotatable about a vertical axis with respect to camera mount 50…”, [0019]), further comprising a remotely-operated camera head or camera platform pivotally attached to a front end of the crane arm (FIGS. 2, 3, (64), [0019]).
PNG
media_image2.png
560
847
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McLaughlin (CA 3054501) and Fitz et al (U.S. Patent No.: 5,177,516) as applied to claims 1, 7, and 12 above, and further in view of Yang (CN 112303401).
Regarding claim 4:
McLaughlin and Fitz disclose and teach of the mobile camera crane unit of claim 1.
McLaughlin and Fitz do not specifically disclose a hydraulic or electric linear actuator having a first end attached to the chassis and a second end attached to the column.
Yang teaches a drive system (FIGS. 3-5) comprises an electric linear actuator (linear movement of (5), [0032]) having a first end attached to a base ((42), [0032]) and a second end attached to a mounting plate ((44) attached to (5), [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the feature of Yang’s with the mobile camera crane unit taught by McLaughlin and Fitz to enable an electric linear actuator having a first end attached to the chassis and a second end attached to the column for the purpose of enabling effortless automatic control of the camera crane unit.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McLaughlin (CA 3054501) and Fitz et al (U.S. Patent No.: 5,177,516) as applied to claims 1, 7, and 12 above, and further in view of Chapman et al. (WO 2011/140245).
Regarding claim 5:
McLaughlin and Fitz disclose and teach of the mobile camera crane unit of claim 1.
McLaughlin and Fitz do not specifically disclose a drive system comprises a gear rack on the column and a pinion gear rotated by an electric motor on the chassis.
Chapman teaches a drive system (FIG. 13) comprises a gear rack on the track (“a rack on the track 132”, [0060]) and a pinion gear ((160), [0060]) rotated by an electric motor ((156)/(158), [0060]) on the carriage ((146), [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the feature of Chapman’s with the mobile camera crane unit taught by McLaughlin and Fitz to enable a gear rack on the column and a pinion gear rotated by an electric motor on the chassis for the purpose of enabling effortless automatic control of the camera crane unit.
Furthermore, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable a gear rack on the column and a pinion gear on the chassis, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed April 13, 2026, with respect to the objections to the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of the claims as points 3(a)-3(d) have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 7, and 12 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, and 8-11 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 17-23 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The primary reason for allowance of claims 17-19 is because the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest in combination the claim 17 limitation for a method, comprising: configuring the camera crane unit into a transport position, wherein a front end of a crane arm of the camera crane is over a cab or windscreen of the highway over the road vehicle and a column of the camera crane slidably movable on a deck of the highway over the road vehicle is adjacent to a longitudinal center of a wheelbase of the highway over the road vehicle; operating the camera crane by tilting the crane arm so that a back end of the crane arm is below the deck, in combination with all other claim limitations in total.
The primary reason for allowance of claims 20-23 is because the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest in combination the claim 20 limitation for a mobile camera crane unit, comprising: a drive system configured to move the column linearly on the chassis, the drive system including a motor configured to move the column longitudinally on the rails from a first position at least 0.4DD in front of the rear axle to a second position within 0.1DD of the rear axle, a back end of the crane arm pivotable to a position below the deck when the column is in the second position, in combination with all other claim limitations in total.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 FANG-CHI CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5299. The examiner can normally be reached MRF 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, STEPHANIE BLOSS can be reached at 5712723555. 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.
/FANG-CHI CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights