DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Office Action on the Merits and is directed towards claims 1-20 as originally presented and filed on 11/06/2023.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
No apparent Priority is claimed accordingly the earliest filing date is 06 November 2023 (20231106).
The present application filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609 [R-07.2022], Applicant's 11/06/2023 submission(s) of Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)(s) is/are acknowledged by the Examiner and the reference(s) cited therein has/have been considered in the examination of the claim(s) now pending. A copy of the submitted IDS(s) initialed and dated by the Examiner is/are attached to the instant Office action.
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, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 9-13, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5685377 A to Arstein; Richard A. et al. (hereinafter Arstein provided in the 11/06/2023 IDS) in view of US 20200359543 A1 to (Dix; Peter John).
Regarding claim 1 Arstein teaches in for example the Figure(s) reproduced immediately below:
PNG
media_image1.png
393
681
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
417
646
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and associated descriptive texts a control system for controlling a position of a work implement (as shown in for example Fig. 2 and Fig. 1 respectively “ripper control system 200” controls the position of the “ripper 145” as explained in for example only the following citation:
“(2) The following detailed description of the invention will describe one application of the preferred embodiment of the preferred use on an earth working machine, such as a bulldozer. Shown in FIG. 1 is a side elevational view of a bulldozer 100 having an elongated blade 105 and a ripper 145.
(3) The machine 100 has a frame 110, an undercarriage 115 connected to the frame 110, and a prime mover 120 such as an internal combustion engine. The prime mover 125 is drivingly connected to an endless track 130 of the undercarriage 115, in any conventional well known manner. The prime mover rotates the track 130 and propels the machine 100 over the underlying terrain.
(4) The blade 105 is controlled through the movement and positioning of blade lift cylinders 135 and blade tilt cylinders 140. Although not shown, the machine preferably includes two blade lift cylinders 135 and two blade tilt cylinders 140, one on each side of the blade 105. The ripper 145 is controlled through movement and positioning of a ripper tilt cylinder 150 and a ripper lift cylinder 155.
(5) Referring to FIG. 2, a block diagram of the ripper control system 200 associated with the present invention is shown. The control system 200 provides for both automatic and manual control of the ripper 145. Preferably, the ripper control system includes a microprocessor based controller 205. The controller 205 is adapted to sense a plurality of inputs and responsively produce output signals which are delivered to various hydraulic actuators or cylinders of the control system.”),
the control system comprising:
a work implement positioning system that is configured to be operated for moving the work implement (given the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) connotes Fig. 2);
a sensor associated with the work implement and configured to obtain position information of the work implement (given the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) connotes sensors 220 and 225 in Fig. 2 and the following citation:
“(8) Position sensing means 215 produces position signals in response to the position of the ripper 145. In one embodiment, the position sensing means 215 includes a pressure sensor 225 that senses the hydraulic pressure within a respective ripper cylinder 150,155 and produces a position signal in response to sensing a hydraulic pressure spike. The hydraulic pressure spike is indicative of the ripper being at the fully raised position. Note that, a pressure switch is a suitable replacement for the pressure sensor. In another embodiment, the position sensing means 225 includes a timer 235 that counts down (or up) from a first predetermined time value to a second predetermined time value and responsively produces a position signal. For example, the timer 235 initiates a count down sequence in response to the operator depressing the auto-return button 210. Once the timer 235 reaches a second predetermined time value, such as zero, then the ripper is said to at the fully raised position. In yet another embodiment, the position sensing means 215 may include displacement sensors 220,225 that sense the amount of cylinder extension in the ripper tilt and lift cylinders 150, 155 and responsively produce position signals indicative of the amount of cylinder extension in the respective cylinders. For example, the displacement sensors 220,225 may include a linear variable differential transformer (LVDT). It should be noted that other well known devices, for example, a magnetostrictive sensor, yo-yo type encoder, potentiometer, or resolver, and an RF signal generator are suitable replacements for the LVDT and within the scope of the invention.”);
and a controller configured to:
initiate, based on the position information of the work implement corresponding to a desired position of the work implement, a timer that is configured to indicate when a predetermined period of time has elapsed (as shown in Fig. 2 controller 205 contains timer 235:
“(9) The position signals are delivered to the controller 205 via a signal conditioner circuit 230 which converts the position signals into digital signals for the purpose of further processing. Such signal conditioner circuits are well known in the art. Note that, the signal conditioner circuit 230 may be part of the controller 205 and implemented in software.”),
cause, based on the timer indicating that the predetermined period of time has elapsed, the work implement positioning system to be operated to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position (as explained above once the auto-return 210 is pressed the time begins and “Once the timer 235 reaches a second predetermined time value, such as zero, then the ripper is said to at the fully raised position.”);
and determine, based on the position information of the work implement, that the work implement has returned to the desired position (as taught by sensors 220/225 “the position sensing means 215 may include displacement sensors 220,225 that sense the amount of cylinder extension in the ripper tilt and lift cylinders 150, 155 and responsively produce position signals indicative of the amount of cylinder extension in the respective cylinders. For example, the displacement sensors 220,225 may include a linear variable differential transformer (LVDT).”).
Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are NOT imported into the claims. The Examiner must give the claim language the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) the claims allow.
See MPEP 2111.01 Plain Meaning [R-10.2024], which states
II. IT IS IMPROPER TO IMPORT CLAIM LIMITATIONS FROM THE SPECIFICATION
"Though understanding the claim language may be aided by explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into a claim limitations that are not part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment." Superguide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875, 69 USPQ2d 1865, 1868 (Fed. Cir. 2004). See also Liebel-Flarsheim Co. v. Medrad Inc., 358 F.3d 898, 906, 69 USPQ2d 1801, 1807 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (discussing recent cases wherein the court expressly rejected the contention that if a patent describes only a single embodiment, the claims of the patent must be construed as being limited to that embodiment); E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369, 67 USPQ2d 1947, 1950 (Fed. Cir. 2003) ("Inter US-20100280751-A1 1pretation of descriptive statements in a patent’s written description is a difficult task, as an inherent tension exists as to whether a statement is a clear lexicographic definition or a description of a preferred embodiment. The problem is to interpret claims ‘in view of the specification’ without unnecessarily importing limitations from the specification into the claims."); Altiris Inc. v. Symantec Corp., 318 F.3d 1363, 1371, 65 USPQ2d 1865, 1869-70 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (Although the specification discussed only a single embodiment, the court held that it was improper to read a specific order of steps into method claims where, as a matter of logic or grammar, the language of the method claims did not impose a specific order on the performance of the method steps, and the specification did not directly or implicitly require a particular order). See also subsection IV., below. When an element is claimed using language falling under the scope of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 6th paragraph (often broadly referred to as means- (or step-) plus- function language), the specification must be consulted to determine the structure, material, or acts corresponding to the function recited in the claim, and the claimed element is construed as limited to the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. In re Donaldson, 16 F.3d 1189, 29 USPQ2d 1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (see MPEP § 2181- MPEP § 2186).
In Zletz, supra, the examiner and the Board had interpreted claims reading "normally solid polypropylene" and "normally solid polypropylene having a crystalline polypropylene content" as being limited to "normally solid linear high homopolymers of propylene which have a crystalline polypropylene content." The court ruled that limitations, not present in the claims, were improperly imported from the specification. See also In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 799, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ("'[C]laims are not to be read in a vacuum, and limitations therein are to be interpreted in light of the specification in giving them their ‘broadest reasonable interpretation.'" (quoting In re Okuzawa, 537 F.2d 545, 548, 190 USPQ 464, 466 (CCPA 1976)). The court looked to the specification to construe "essentially free of alkali metal" as including unavoidable levels of impurities but no more.).”
Arstein does not appear to expressly disclose wherein drifting of the work implement, away from the desired position to a current position, occurs without operation of the work implement positioning system.
In analogous art Dix teaches in for example, the figures below:
PNG
media_image3.png
460
715
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
399
517
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
744
543
media_image5.png
Greyscale
And associated descriptive texts drifting of a work implement, away from the desired position to a current position, occurs without operation of the work implement positioning system (in for example Fig. 7 and paras:
“[0056] FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of an embodiment of a method or process 270 for controlling operation of the agricultural system based on the determined orientation of the agricultural implement. In some embodiments, the method 270 may be performed based on the calibration, as determined by the steps of the method 240 for establishing the relationship between the state of the reference element(s) and the orientation of the agricultural implement. For example, a previously performed calibration may be retrieved and implemented for use by the method 270. However, if a relevant calibration is not available, the steps of the method 240 may be performed prior to performing the method 270. At block 272, the state of the reference element(s) is monitored, such as via the remote sensor(s). The state of the reference element(s) may be continuously monitored. Additionally or alternatively, the state of the reference element(s) may be monitored at a certain frequency, such as a number of times within a time interval.
[0057] At block 274, the state of the reference element(s) is used to determine the orientation of the agricultural implement. For example, the orientation of the implement is determined based on feedback from the remote sensor using the calibration of the method 240. The particular state of the reference element may be used to determine if the agricultural implement is rolled, pitched, yawed, or any combination thereof, relative to the desired orientation. In further embodiments, the particular state of the reference element may be used to determine a particular extent (e.g., angle) that the agricultural implement is rolled, pitched, yawed, or any combination thereof, relative to the desired orientation.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the implement positioning system disclosed in Dix with the implement positioning system taught in Arstein with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have “reduced drifting or slipping of the agricultural implement” and “aligned the agricultural implement with the route.” as taught by Dix Para(s):
“[0059] As mentioned, in certain embodiments, the agricultural system may be controlled to direct the agricultural implement to follow a route. That is, the orientation between the work vehicle and the agricultural implement may be used to determine a position of the agricultural implement with the field, and whether the agricultural implement is following the route. If the agricultural implement is not following the route, the operation of the agricultural system may be controlled to adjust the agricultural implement to follow the route. In some embodiments, the agricultural system may be operated to control movement of the agricultural implement with respect to a direction of travel of the work vehicle. For example, the agricultural system may be operated to adjust the orientation between the work vehicle and the agricultural implement to reduce drifting or slipping of the agricultural implement and to align the agricultural implement with the route.”.
Regarding claim 2 and the limitation the control system of claim 1, wherein, based on determining that the work implement has returned to the desired position, the controller is further configured to:
re-initiate the timer;
and cause, based on the timer, after being re-initiated, indicating that the predetermined period of time has elapsed, the work implement positioning system to be operated to return the work implement to the desired position (given the BRI it is considered that this is the normal operation of Arstein, that is each time the operator presses the auto button 210 the timer is activated and the ripper is moved to the fully raised position. The operator then uses joystick 245 to control the ripper as is known to a Person of Ordinary Skill In The Art (POSITA).
Regarding claim 3 and the limitation the control system of claim 1,
wherein the controller is configured to repeat initiating the timer and causing the work implement positioning system to be operated to return the work implement to the desired position until an operator commands the work implement to move away from the desired position through a work implement input device (given the BRI it is considered that this is the normal operation of Arstein, that is each time the operator presses the auto button 210 the timer is activated and the ripper is moved to the fully raised position. The operator then uses joystick 245 to control the ripper as is known to a Person of Ordinary Skill In The Art (POSITA).
Regarding claim 4 and the limitation the control system of claim 1, wherein the desired position is a travel position or an idle position of the work implement (see the teachings of Arstein above with regard to the rip[per being fully raised).
Regarding claim 5 and the limitation the control system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to provide a service alert based on an actual amount of movement to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position exceeding a predetermined threshold (given the BRI see the teachings of Dix para :
“[0035] The controller may additionally or alternatively output a notification and/or other information (e.g., onto the display 146) indicative of a recommended control action. For instance, the controller may output instructions to the user interface of the cab indicative of a suggested manual operation to control the agricultural system, such that the orientation between the work vehicle and the agricultural implement may be adjusted toward a desired orientation. As such, the user may manually control the operation of the agricultural system based on the notification and/or information output by the controller.)”.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the notifications disclosed in Dix with the control system taught in Arstein with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have allowed the user to manually control operation of the agricultural system based on the notification as taught by Dix Para(s) [0035] above.
Regarding claim 9 and the limitation a machine comprising:
a machine frame (see Arstein Fig. 1);
a work implement supported on the machine frame (see Arstein Fig. 1);
a work implement positioning system for moving the work implement to a desired position (see Arstein Fig. 1);
a sensor associated with the work implement and configured to obtain position information of the work implement (see Arstein Figs. 1 and 2);
and a controller configured to:
initiate, based on the position information of the work implement corresponding to a desired position of the work implement, a timer that is configured to indicate when a predetermined period of time has elapsed (see Arstein Figs. 1 and 2),
wherein drifting of the work implement, away from the desired position to a current position, occurs without operation of the work implement positioning system (see the teachings of and obviousness to combine Dix);
cause, based on the timer indicating that the predetermined period of time has elapsed, the work implement positioning system to be operated to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position (see Arstein Figs. 1 and 2);
and determine, based on the position information of the work implement, that the work implement has returned to the desired position (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 1 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 10 and the limitation the machine of claim 9, wherein, based on determining that the work implement has returned to the desired position, the controller is further configured to: re-initiate the timer; and cause, based on the timer, after being re-initiated, indicating that the predetermined period of time has elapsed, the work implement positioning system to be operated to return the work implement to the desired position (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 2 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 11 and the limitation the machine of claim 10, wherein the controller is configured to repeat initiating the timer and causing the work implement positioning system to be operated to return the work implement to the desired position until an operator commands the work implement to move away from the desired position through a work implement input device (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 3 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 12 and the limitation the machine of claim 9, wherein the desired position is a travel position or an idle position of the work implement (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 4 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 13 and the limitation the machine of claim 9, wherein the controller is configured to provide a service alert based on an actual amount of movement to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position exceeding a predetermined threshold (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 5 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 17 and the limitation A method for controlling movement of a work implement to a desired position, the method comprising:
placing the work implement in the desired position;
initiating, based on the work implement being placed in the desired position, a timer that is configured to indicate when a predetermined period of time has elapsed;
wherein drifting of the work implement, away from the desired position to a current position, occurs without operation of the work implement positioning system;
causing, based on the timer indicating that the predetermined period of time has elapsed, the work implement to be moved from the current position to the desired position;
re-initiating the timer upon determining that the work implement has returned to the desired position;
and causing, based on the timer, after being re-initiated, indicating that the predetermined period of time has elapsed, the work implement to return to the desired position (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claims 1-3 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 18 and the limitation the method of claim 17, further including the step of providing a service alert based on an amount of movement to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position exceeding a predetermined threshold (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 5 above incorporated herein by reference).
Claims 6 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5685377 A to Arstein; Richard A. et al. (hereinafter Arstein provided in the 11/06/2023 IDS) in view of US 20200359543 A1 to (Dix; Peter John) as applied to the claims above in view of US 20050221948 A1 to Iwamoto, Ikuhiro et al. (hereinafter Iwamoto).
Regarding claims 6 and the limitation the control system of claim 1, wherein the work implement positioning system includes:
at least one hydraulic actuator powered by a hydraulic system containing hydraulic fluid (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 1 above incorporated herein by reference and especially Fig. 1 of Arstein).
The combination of Arstein does not appear to expressly disclose a hydraulic temperature sensor in communication with the controller and configured to indicate a temperature of the hydraulic fluid.
In analogous art Yamada teaches in for example, the figures below:
PNG
media_image6.png
633
528
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
601
577
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
756
496
media_image8.png
Greyscale
And associated descriptive texts a hydraulic temperature sensor in communication with the controller and configured to indicate a temperature of the hydraulic fluid (in for example Figs. 1 and 3 oil temperature sensor 15 as explained in fore example paras:
“[0023] Engine 1 and automatic transmission 2 are controlled by an engine control unit (ECU) 6 and an automatic transmission control unit (ATCU) 7, respectively. ECU 6 and ATCU 7 each include input/output devices, memories such as ROM, RAM, and BURAM in which multiple control programs and data maps are stored, a central processing unit (CPU), and a time counter (not shown). ECU 6 is connected at its input section to a crank angle sensor 8 for measuring an engine speed Ne of engine 1 and crank angles of cylinders, a coolant temperature sensor 9 for measuring a coolant temperature TW, an air flow sensor 10 for measuring a quantity of intake air, a throttle position sensor 11 for measuring a throttle opening .theta.TH of a throttle valve, an idle switch 12 for detecting a closed state of the throttle valve, and other sensors and switches. On the other hand, ATCU 7 is connected at its input section to a transmission input speed sensor 13 for measuring a rotational speed NT of a turbine shaft of torque converter 3 (a transmission input speed), a transmission output speed sensor 14 for measuring a rotational speed N.sub.0 of a transfer drive gear (a transmission output speed), instead of a vehicle speed V, an oil temperature sensor 15 for measuring an oil temperature of ATF oil flowing within automatic transmission 2, an engine speed sensor 16 for measuring an engine speed Ne based on sensed ignition pulses, and sensors and switches such as an inhibitor switch (not shown).
[0039] Clutch approach period adjustment T.sub.C is retrieved from a predetermined data map as shown in FIG. 6A. This data map is a three-dimensional data map having an axis of oil temperature Ts at the last engine stop, and an axis of temperature drop .DELTA.T.sub.SR. Oil temperature T.sub.S as a first oil temperature, and oil temperature T.sub.R as a second temperature are detected by oil temperature sensor 15, at a first time point when the engine is last stopped, and at a second time point when the engine restarted after a period of soak, respectively. Temperature drop .DELTA.T.sub.SR is the difference (T.sub.S-T.sub.R) between oil temperature T.sub.S and oil temperature T.sub.R.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the hydraulic temperature sensor disclosed in Yamada with the control system taught in the combination of Arstein with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have “taken into account the viscosity of the fluid and the low responsiveness of the hydraulic fluid” as the temperature increases as taught to be known to a POSITA by Yamada Para(s):
“[0042] The viscosity of the hydraulic fluid decreases with increasing temperature of the hydraulic fluid, so that the quantity of the hydraulic fluid which drops from the chamber of clutch piston 24 to oil pan 32 increases. On the contrary, the viscosity of the hydraulic fluid increases with decreasing temperature of the hydraulic fluid, so that the quantity of the hydraulic fluid which drops from the chamber of clutch piston 24 to oil pan 32 decreases. Accordingly, clutch approach period Tf needed tends to increase with increasing temperature of the hydraulic fluid. On the other hand, a large increase in the viscosity of the hydraulic fluid in accordance with a large decrease in the temperature of the hydraulic fluid leads to a low responsiveness of the hydraulic fluid. Accordingly, clutch approach period Tf needed tends to increase with decreasing temperature of the hydraulic fluid. These two aspects of clutch approach period Tf are combined to be a complex map as shown in FIG. 6A. Thus, in the first stage, turbine speed NT remains constant, with hydraulic clutch 20 not engaged to establish a gear ratio.”.
Regarding claim 14 and the limitation the machine of claim 9, wherein the work implement positioning system includes: at least one hydraulic actuator powered by a hydraulic system containing hydraulic fluid; and a hydraulic temperature sensor in communication with the controller and configured to indicate a temperature of the hydraulic fluid (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 6 above incorporated herein by reference).
Claims 7, 8, 15, 16, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5685377 A to Arstein; Richard A. et al. (hereinafter Arstein provided in the 11/06/2023 IDS) in view of US 20200359543 A1 to (Dix; Peter John) as applied to the claims above in view of US 20050221948 A1 to Iwamoto, Ikuhiro et al. (hereinafter Iwamoto) as applied to the claims above in view of US 20050137056 A1 to Yamada, Jun et al. (hereinafter Yamada).
Regarding claim 7 the combination of Arstein does not appear to expressly disclose, however in analogous art Yamada teaches in for example, the figures below:
PNG
media_image9.png
641
565
media_image9.png
Greyscale
And associated descriptive texts a controller configured to adjust a predetermined period of time based the temperature of a hydraulic fluid (in for example para:
“[0014] In general, the viscosity (or flowability) of hydraulic fluid varies depending on the temperature of hydraulic fluid. This gives significant influence to the predetermined period provided between the beginning of the drain control and completion of draining the hydraulic fluid. Considering the above characteristics, it is preferable to determine the predetermined period based on the temperature of the hydraulic fluid stored in the speed change mechanism. With this arrangement, the predetermined period can be adequately changed or adjusted in accordance with the temperature of hydraulic fluid. Accordingly, a reliable control is feasible regardless of the temperature of hydraulic fluid.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the temperature control disclosed in Yamada with the hydraulic control taught in the combination of Arstein with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have determined the preferable amount of time necessary to operate based on the temperature of the hydraulic fluid as taught by Yamada Para(s):
“[0061] In general, the viscosity (flowability) of hydraulic fluid varies depending on the temperature of hydraulic fluid. The period of time from starting the drain control for the clutch C2 to completing the discharging of hydraulic fluid is variable. Accordingly, it is desirable to set the predetermined value k in accordance with the temperature of hydraulic fluid. Furthermore, it is also preferable to correct the predetermined value k with reference to the duration of the charge control carried out immediately before starting the drain control.”.
Regarding claim 8 and the limitation the control system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to adjust the predetermined period of time based on an operating time of the work implement positioning system to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 7 above incorporated herein by reference wherein given the BRI is it considered that Yamada teaches adjusting k based on the temperature which a POSITA would understand determines how fast the work implement will move from one position to another. It is considered that the prior art teaches the claimed range if not close).
See MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024]I. OVERLAPPING, APPROACHING, AND SIMILAR RANGES, AMOUNTS, AND PROPORTIONS.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976);
Regarding claim 15 and the limitation the machine of claim 14, wherein the controller is configured to adjust the predetermined period of time based the temperature of the hydraulic fluid (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claims 7 and 14 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 16 and the limitation the machine of claim 9, wherein the controller is configured to adjust the predetermined period of time based on an operating time of the work implement positioning system to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claims 8 and 9 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 19 and the limitation the method of claim 17, further including the step of adjusting the predetermined period of time based a hydraulic fluid temperature (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claims 7 and 17 above incorporated herein by reference).
Regarding claim 20 and the limitation the method of claim 17, further including the step of adjusting the predetermined period of time based on an operating time to return the work implement from the current position to the desired position (see the rejection of corresponding parts of claims 8 and 17 above incorporated herein by reference).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as teaching, inter alia, the state of the art of work equipment temperature control and timers at the time of the invention. For example:
US 3662220 A to Riebs; Richard E. teaches, inter alia a TIME DELAY DEVICE in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“(3) Prior art time delay devices generally utilized in reclosers and repeating circuit interrupters are either hydraulic, mechanical or electromagnetic. The hydraulic time delay devices, such as dash pots, are not entirely satisfactory because temperature changes tend to change the viscosity of the hydraulic fluid and, as a result, the time-delay characteristic of the device. Electromagnetic time delay devices, such as induction relays, are also unsatisfactory because the induction disc cannot be rapidly reset after the disappearance of a fault, because the inertia of the induction disc tends to result in coasting, and because the pull-in current of such devices is substantially greater than their dropout current and as a result the device cannot reset after the disappearance of a fault unless there was a sufficient current drop. Another shortcoming of prior art time delay devices are their large number of moving parts which greatly increases maintenance costs and inherently subjects them to changes in their time-current characteristics due to wear. Also, because the speed of the mechanical components of these devices are, of course, dependent on the magnitude of the fault current, they are extremely inaccurate at very low values of fault current.”.
US 20050065689 A1 to Budde, Steven Conrad et al. teaches, inter alia Work implement control system and method in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“A system and method for controlling a work implement of a work machine are provided. A preset position for the work implement is established. An implement positioning system is enabled. An indication of a change in a travel direction of the work machine is received. The work implement is moved to the preset position in response to the indication of the change in the travel direction when the implement positioning system is enabled.”.
US 20150198074 A1 to Mori; Tadashi et al. teaches, inter alia a WORK VEHICLE in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“A work vehicle includes an engine, an injector injecting a reducing agent to an exhaust gas exhausted from the engine, a determination portion determining whether or not a temperature of the injector is high, a stop determination portion determining whether or not the engine has stopped while the injector is in a high-temperature state as a result of determination by the determination portion, a counter counting the number of times of stop of the engine while the injector is in the high-temperature state based on a result of determination by the stop determination portion, and a warning portion giving a warning in connection with stop of the engine when a count value of the counter exceeds a first prescribed value.”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL LAWSON GREENE JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6876. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-THUR 7-5:30PM (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. 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.
/DANIEL L GREENE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665 20260221