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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/01/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 1-11 are amended.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to drawing objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of the drawing have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to specification objections have been fully considered. The objections of the specification have been withdrawn except for the objection to Para[0016], which was not persuasive. Applicant argues that the cab 13 is to the left of the boom 21 in Figures 1 and 3. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Figure 1 shows Cab 13 is to the right of the boom 21.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the claim objection to Claim 10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claim 10 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C 112(b) for Claims 1-11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Claims 1-11 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C 103 of Claims 1-11 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. A new rejection under 35 U.S.C 103 is applied for Claims 1-3 and 6-11 under prior arts Nakano (US 20200394726 A1 ) in view of Sherlock (US 20200011033 A1) and Uji (US 20190017249 A1) in light of applicant’s amendments.
With regards to Claim 1 applicant argues that Nakano does not teach “the soil quality information acquisition part”, as the geological data acquisition unit 106 in Nakano inputs geological data manually by an operator, whereas the instant application recites “a soil quality information acquisition part that is configured to acquire the soil quality information in accordance with a counterforce accompanied by contact of a bucket distal end of the working attachment with the ground”. Arguments directed to claim amendments are addressed in the rejection below.
With regards to Claim 1, Applicant further argues that Uji does not teach “the acquisition time determination part” of the instant application as Uji allegedly teaches merely a “predicted requisite time of the work” but not “a time for the soil quality information acquisition part to acquire the soil quality information”. Applicant further argues that Uji “first acquires information such as the construction target surface, then computes the construction completion prediction time, and does not thereafter acquire soil quality information based on, or in response to, the construction completion prediction time” in contrast to the instant application which “determines the acquisition time and then acquires the soil quality information in accordance with the acquisition time”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The outstanding office action modifies Nakano with Uji, wherein Nakano recites the act of inputting and outputting signals, and the geological data acquisition unit 106, which acquires soil quality information via the geological data, of Nakano operates based on input signals. This input signal is modified with the acquisition time as set by Uji as “more productivity and quality can be achieved when planning and executing construction projects (See Para[0002] in Uji)”. Therefore the combination of Nakano and Uji teach the limitations of Claim 1.
Applicant further argues that Uji allegedly fails to disclose a change in the soil quality as a change in the volume of the soil, parametrized by depth D and angle φ, does not correspond to an actual change of the soil quality in the worksite, as the parameters D and φ are virtual.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims do not mention the type of change for the soil, and thus is recited broadly in the claims. Therefore, the change in the volume of soil is considered a change in the soil quality as the volume of soil is interpreted as a quality of the soil as well.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Para[0016] recites “left side of the boom 21” which should be “right side of the boom 21”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are
position information acquisition part, acquisition time determination part, soil quality information acquisition part, and a storage part in claim 1, which has the corresponding structure of a processor see Para[0028].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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(s) 1, 7, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (US 20200394726 A1 ) in view of Sherlock (US 20200011033 A1) and Uji (US 20190017249 A1).
With regards to Claim 1, Nakano teaches
a position information acquisition part that acquires position information about the working machine on the worksite (See Para[0034] and Fig. 3 "The excavator 1 includes a position detector 23 (i.e. a position information acquisition part) for detecting a position of the swinging body 3 (i.e. working machine )");
a soil quality information acquisition part that is configured to acquire the soil quality information (See Abstract the geological data acquisition unit which is a part of the construction management system and Para[0080] "The geological data acquisition unit 106 (i.e. the soil quality information acquisition part) acquires geological data of the work target. The geological data of the work target includes various pieces of data about geology, such as a geology of the work target, soil properties (clayey, decomposed granite, etc.), a rock quality, and stiffness of ground (i.e. soil quality; examiner notes that under BRI quality is interpreted as property, such as soil amount, hardness, or compactness of the soil)." and Fig. 4, where 106 communicates with the Input/Output unit 110 to receive signals (i.e. it receives signals from another part, which in Nakano is the Input/Output Unit 110))
a storage part (See Para[0008] "a storage unit (i.e. a storage part)”), wherein
the soil quality information acquisition part (See Abstract the geological data acquisition unit) receives the signal output from the part (See Fig. 4, where 106 communicates with the Input/Output unit 110 to receive signals (i.e. receives the signal from the part, which in Nakano is the Input/Output Unit 110)), and acquires the soil quality information in response to the signal (See Fig. 4, the geological data acquisition unit obtains an input signal from 110, and the geological data acquisition unit acquires soil quality information, See Abstract); and
the storage part stores, as a record, the position information acquired by
the position information acquisition part and the soil quality information acquired by the soil
quality information acquisition part in association with each other, the record indicating the soil quality information corresponding to the position information at the acquisition time (See Para[0008] "a storage unit configured to add (i.e. the storage part stores, as a record as the data is recorded), to the two-dimensional image data, the position data of the work machine (i.e. the position information acquired by the position information acquisition part, see Fig. 3 the position detector 23) at a time point at which the two-dimensional image data is acquired (i.e. the position information at the acquisition time), the geological data (i.e. the soil quality information acquired by the soil quality information acquisition part, see Fig. 4 the geological data acquisition unit) of a ground surface included in the two-dimensional image data (i.e. in association with each other, as they are associated together with the two-dimensional image data), and time point data about the time point at which the two-dimensional image data is acquired, and configured to store the two-dimensional image data" where soil quality information is corresponding to the position information at the acquisition time for the position information to be acquired).
However, Nakano is silent to the language of
in accordance with a counterforce accompanied by contact of a bucket distal end of the working attachment with the ground;
an acquisition time determination part that determines an acquisition time on the basis
of soil quality relevant information being information related to a change in the soil quality
on the worksite, and outputs, to the soil quality information acquisition part, an acquisition
signal concerning the acquisition time, the acquisition time being a time for the soil quality information acquisition part to acquire the soil quality information;
receives the acquisition signal output from the acquisition time determination part.
Sherlock teaches
acquire the soil quality information in accordance with a counterforce accompanied by contact of a bucket distal end of the working attachment with the ground (See Para[0021] “Surface sensors 125 include sensors that are able to detect characteristics of the worksite surface 160 (See Fig. 1, where the bucket distal end (for the aggregate 150) is connected to the sensors 120 that contain surface sensors 125, see also Fig. 2 and Para[0021] “Work machine 102 can include several different sensors 120, including blade height sensor 121, blade angle sensor 123, surface sensors 125 ”). Some characteristics include compactness/hardness (i.e. acquire the soil quality information in accordance with a counterforce accompanied by contact), soil type, moisture, etc.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano wherein in accordance with a counterforce accompanied by contact of a bucket distal end of the working attachment with the ground is done like in Sherlock in order to have an automated method to set a condition for acquiring soil quality information in Nakano.
Nakano and Sherlock are silent to the language of
an acquisition time determination part that determines an acquisition time on the basis
of soil quality relevant information being information related to a change in the soil quality
on the worksite, and outputs, to the soil quality information acquisition part, an acquisition
signal concerning the acquisition time, the acquisition time being a time for the soil quality information acquisition part to acquire the soil quality information;
receives the acquisition signal output from the acquisition time determination part.
Nevertheless, Uji teaches
an acquisition time determination part (See Fig. 2 the information controller 60) that determines an acquisition time (See Fig. 2 the construction time computing section 66 which is part of the information controller 60 and Para[0043] “The construction time computing section 66 computes the predicted requisite time (which may be referred to as “the construction completion prediction time) of the work related to the work amount calculated by the earth amount estimating section 64.”) on the basis of soil quality relevant information being information related to a change in the soil quality on the worksite (See Para[0043] “The construction time computing section 66 computes the predicted requisite time (which may be referred to as “the construction completion prediction time) of the work related to the work amount calculated by the earth amount estimating section 64.” Also, the soil quality relevant information includes any information used to calculate the predicted requisite time, such as the surface area position Pt and the depth D in Fig. 12, or even environmental factors. The change in the soil quality is referring to the change in the volume of soil and corresponding work amount as one goes deeper into the surface as done in Uji.), and outputs, to the part, an acquisition signal concerning the acquisition time, the acquisition time being a time for the part to acquire the soil quality information (See Para[0045] “The above set information and computation result (i.e. an acquisition signal concerning the acquisition time, the acquisition time being a time for the part to acquire the soil quality information see Abstract “predicted requisite time”) are displayed on the display device (for example, the monitor in the cab) 67. Further, they are transmitted via the communication device 68 to a management system (i.e. outputs to the part) performing construction management and the like.”);
receives the acquisition signal output from the acquisition time determination part (See Para[0045] “The above set information and computation result (i.e. the acquisition signal) are displayed on the display device (for example, the monitor in the cab) 67. Further, they are transmitted via the communication device 68 to a management system (i.e. the management system receives the acquisition signal) performing construction management and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano and Sherlock to include an acquisition time determination part that determines an acquisition time on the basis of soil quality relevant information being information related to a change in the soil quality on the worksite, and outputs, to the part, an acquisition signal concerning the acquisition time, the acquisition time being a time for the part to acquire the soil quality information and receives the acquisition signal output from the acquisition time determination part like that in Uji for the purpose of computing and outputting the construction completion time. Therefore, more productivity and quality can be achieved when planning and executing construction projects (See Para[0002] in Uji).
With regards to Claim 7, Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji teach the limitations of claim 1. Nakano and Sherlock are silent to the language of
the acquisition time determination part determines the acquisition time on the basis of an elapsed time period from a previous acquisition time of soil quality information by the soil quality information acquisition part, the elapsed time period being included in the soil quality relevant information.
Nevertheless, Uji teaches
the acquisition time determination part determines the acquisition time on the basis of an elapsed time period from a previous acquisition time of soil quality information by the soil quality information acquisition part, the elapsed time period being included in the soil quality relevant information (See Para[0060] “based on the progress of the work estimated as described above and the time that has elapsed (i.e. an elapsed time period) from the work start (i.e. which begins after establishing a previous acquisition time see Para[0045] “The above set information and computation result are displayed on the display device (for example, the monitor in the cab) 67. Further, they are transmitted via the communication device 68 to a management system performing construction management”, where “computation result” refers to the previous acquisition time see Para[0044] “ In the computation of the construction completion prediction time”), the work processing speed is updated as appropriate during the work, whereby it is possible to compute a more accurate processing speed (i.e. the work processing speed is updated based on an elapsed time period)”, where the work processing speed is used to compute the construction completion prediction time, see Para[0043] “The earth amount estimated by the earth amount estimating section 64 and the work processing speed of the front work device 30 stored in the construction time measurement/storage section 65 are input to the construction time computing section 66, and, based on these, the construction completion prediction time is computed (i.e. the acquisition time).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano and Sherlock to include the acquisition time determination part which determines the acquisition time on the basis of an elapsed time period from a previous acquisition time of soil quality information by the soil quality information acquisition part, the elapsed time period being included in the soil quality relevant information like that of Uji for the purpose of updating the construction completion prediction time. Therefore, more productivity and quality can be achieved when planning and executing construction projects (See Para[0002] in Uji).
With regards to Claim 11, Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji teach the limitations of claim 1. Nakano further teaches
a working machine (See Para[0027] "FIG. 1 is a perspective view illustrating an example of a work machine 1 according to the present embodiment."), comprising:
a machine body having a traveling part travelable on a ground (See Para[0028] "The vehicle body 1B includes a swinging body 3, and a traveling body 5 which supports the swinging body 3 in a swingable manner." );
a working attachment supported by the machine body movably relative to the machine body for performing a predetermined work to the ground (See Fig. 3, where the work machine contains detection processing device 51 and Fig. 4 where the detection processing device 51 further comprises geological data acquisition unit 106 which helps to determine information about a work target before the work, i.e., a predetermined work on the ground, which would be the work performed by the work machine in Nakano).
Claim(s) 2,3, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (US 20200394726 A1 ), Sherlock (US 20200011033 A1), and Uji (US 20190017249 A1), and further in view of Nishizawa (US 20200048871 A1).
With regards to Claim 2, Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji teach the limitations of claim 1. Nakano and Sherlock are silent to the language of
the acquisition time determination part sets a reference area virtually estimated to have a specific soil quality on the worksite, and determines the acquisition time on the basis of a relative position of the working machine to the reference area, the relative position being included in the soil quality relevant information.
Uji teaches
the acquisition time determination part sets a reference volume (See Para[0041] “The positional information on the construction target surface and the current surface computed by the surface computing section 63, and information on the construction distance L from the set information input section 61 are input to the earth amount estimating section 64. Based thereon, the estimated volume of the construction object (estimated earth amount) is computed, and the volume is regarded as the work amount.”), and determines the acquisition time on the basis of a relative position of the reference point to the reference area, the relative position being included in the soil quality relevant information (The acquisition time is calculated, see Para[0043] “The construction time computing section 66 computes the predicted requisite time (which may be referred to as “the construction completion prediction time) of the work related to the work amount calculated by the earth amount estimating section 64.” based on the relative position of the construction area to the reference point O in Para[0040] “The position of the construction target surface can be computed from the position of the reference point O (i.e. the reference point), the depth D (i.e. the relative position) of the construction target surface input from the set information input section 61, and the angle ∅.” and Para[0041] “The positional information on the construction target surface and the current surface computed by the surface computing section 63, and information on the construction distance L from the set information input section 61 are input to the earth amount estimating section 64. Based thereon, the estimated volume of the construction object (estimated earth amount) is computed, and the volume is regarded as the work amount.” Therefore, the soil quality relevant information includes the relative position D of the construction target surface to the reference point O as it is used to calculate the construction completion prediction time.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano and Sherlock wherein the acquisition time determination part sets a reference area virtually estimated to have a specific soil quality on the worksite, and determines the acquisition time on the basis of a relative position of the working machine to the reference area, the relative position being included in the soil quality relevant information like that in Uji. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Nakano and Sherlock because Uji teaches a system that includes a time acquisition part that can set a reference volume and determines the acquisition time based on the relative position of the construction target surface to the reference point (the relative position being included in the soil quality relevant information), which will allow a more efficient method to excavate soil in a predetermined region (See Para[0002] of Uji).
Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji are silent to the language of
sets a reference area virtually estimated to have a specific soil quality on the worksite, and calculate a relative position of the working machine to the reference area.
Nishizawa teaches
sets a reference area (See Fig. 7 the working region setting section 223) virtually estimated to have a specific soil quality on the worksite (See Para[0073] ”The converted terrain information thus generated is output to the terrain information reliability evaluation section 222 and the working region setting section 223” and Para[0074] “the converted terrain information 321 in the embodiment includes height 321a, material information (material data) 321b (i.e. soil quality), a data-acquiring time 321c, and a data-acquiring sensor type 321d” and Para[0075] “the material information 321b may be, for example, information in which material itself such as earth, stones, rocks and the like is identified, or the hardness of the region (i.e. specific soil quality)”), and calculate a relative position of the working machine to the reference area (See Para[0107] “the working region setting section 223 determines by comparison between a distance Rn from the origin to the center coordinates (Xn, Yn) of the region of interest Area(n) and a radius threshold Rth (i.e. virtually estimating a reference area)” and see Fig. 13.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji with Nishizawa wherein Nishizawa sets a reference area virtually estimated to have a specific soil quality on the worksite, and calculate a relative position of the working machine to the reference area. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji because Nishizawa teaches a system that can set a reference area instead of a reference volume like in Uji, where a reference area is just a subset of a reference volume. Doing so will allow for Nakano to more efficiently calculate the amount of time required to excavate a region via Uji. In addition, Nishizawa teaches a system that calculates a relative position of the working machine to a reference area, which will allow for a more simple and uniform methodology to calculate the positions of relevant areas of interest in a working region.
With regards to claim 3, Nakano, Sherlock, Uji, and Nishizawa teach the limitations of claim 2. Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji are silent to the language of
the acquisition time determination part sets, as the reference area, an area defined by a reference circle having a predetermined radius from the center of the machine body in a plan view at a predetermined reference time.
Nishizawa teaches
an area defined by a reference circle having a predetermined radius from the center of the machine body (See Para[0095] “As illustrated in FIG. 13, the working region is basically inside the circumference 520 (i.e. the reference circle) that is centered at the origin in the xy plane in the vehicle-body coordinate system 900, and has, as a radius, a line segment connecting the origin and a xy projection point in the distal end position of the bucket 113 (i.e. a predetermined radius).”) in a plan view (See Fig. 13) at a predetermined reference time (See Fig. 13, the working region is set once the iterative process is completed, and the predetermined time is that of the last box in the grid of Fig. 13, as each box has an associated data-acquiring time, see Fig. 10 grid 321c.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji wherein an area defined by a reference circle having a predetermined radius from the center of the machine body is done like that in Nishizawa. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji because Nishizawa teaches a reference area to be a circle of a predetermined radius, which will more clearly and uniformly define the region of interest for a work done in a timely manner via the predetermined time.
With regards to Claim 6, Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji teach the limitations of claim 2. Nakano and Sherlock are silent to the language of
the acquisition time determination part sets, as the reference area, a range from the machine body to a predetermined depth under the ground at a predetermined reference time.
Nevertheless, Uji teaches
the acquisition time determination part sets, as the reference area, a range from the machine body to a predetermined depth under the ground (See Para[0105] “there is first set a set coordinate system using an arbitrary point as the origin (reference point O), and the construction target surface and the current surface are set in the coordinate system”. Therefore, set the origin point O to the machine body (See Para[0024] and Fig. 1 the upper swing structure 20) and calculate depth D (i.e. the range in this scenario, which also functions as a relative position from reference point O) from there as O can be chosen arbitrarily.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano and Sherlock wherein the acquisition time determination part sets, as the reference area, a range from the machine body to a predetermined depth under the ground like that in Uji. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Nakano and Sherlock with Uji because Uji teaches a system that can set a predetermined depth as a reference area, which will allow Nakano to be more diverse in the types of soil that can be excavated by being able to parametrize exactly how deep into the ground the soil can be excavated.
Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji are silent to the language of
a predetermined reference time.
Nishizawa teaches
a predetermined reference time (See Fig. 13, the working region is set once the iterative process is completed, and the predetermined time is that of the last box in the grid of Fig. 13, as each box has an associated data-acquiring time, see Fig. 10 grid 321c.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji wherein a predetermined reference time is taught like that in Nishizawa. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji because Nishizawa teaches a system that can attach a predetermined reference time to the step of setting a reference area, which will allow the process of soil excavation to be more efficient and organized.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (US 20200394726 A1 ), Sherlock (US 20200011033 A1), and Uji (US 20190017249 A1) further in view of Shimamura (US 20200347581 A1).
With regards to Claim 8, Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji teach the limitations of claim 1. Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji are silent to the language of
a climate information acquisition part configured to acquire climate information for the worksite, wherein the acquisition time determination part determines the acquisition time on the basis of the climate information acquired by the climate information acquisition part, the climate information being included in the soil quality relevant information.
Shimamura teaches
a climate information acquisition part configured to acquire climate information for the worksite, wherein the acquisition time determination part determines the acquisition time on the basis of the climate information acquired by the climate information acquisition part, the climate information being included in the soil quality relevant information (See Para[0276] “a work schedule generation section (i.e. the acquisition time determination part, as the work schedule determines how long to work for the machine i.e. an acquisition time) to generate work schedule information in which (i) identification information indicating each of the plurality of subareas, (ii) a timing to perform a work related to a growing of the plant in the subarea, (iii) at least one of a type and intensity of the work in the subarea are associated based on a sunshine condition in each subarea of the work region determined by the sunshine condition determination section (i.e. the climate information acquisition part).”As the climate information is used here to determine the work schedule, i.e. the acquisition time, it is included in the soil quality relevant information, see Claim 1 above.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji by including a climate information acquisition part configured to acquire climate information for the worksite, wherein the acquisition time determination part determines the acquisition time on the basis of the climate information acquired by the climate information acquisition part, the climate information being included in the soil quality relevant information of Shimamura for the purpose of determining the work schedule or the amount of work time. Therefore the effect of climate on work activities can be accounted for (see e.g. Shimamura [0142]).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (US 20200394726 A1 ), Sherlock (US 20200011033 A1), and Uji (US 20190017249 A1) further in view of Harwell (US 20170289121 A1).
With regards to Claim 9, Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji teach the limitations of claim 1. Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji are silent to the language of
the storage part is located away from the working machine, the soil quality information acquisition system further comprising:
a transmission part that transmits the position information acquired by the position information acquisition part and the soil quality information acquired by the soil quality information acquisition part; and
a receiving part that is located away from the transmission part, and receives the position information and the soil quality information transmitted from the transmission part and inputs the position information and the soil quality information into the storage part.
Harwell teaches
the storage part is located away from the working machine (See Fig. 1 the data store 188),
a transmission part that transmits the information (See Fig. 1 the communication system(s) 152 and Para[0029] “Communication systems 152 (i.e. any one of which is the transmission part) are illustratively one or more communication systems that allow machine 104 to communicate (i.e. transmit information) with mobile device 102 and administrative computing system 106”); and
a receiving part that is located away from the transmission part (See Fig. 1 the administrative computing system 106 is the receiving part, which is separate from the communication system 152 in the work machine), and receives the information transmitted from the transmission part and inputs the information into the storage part (See Fig. 1 the data store 188).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji wherein the storage part is located away from the working machine, the soil quality information acquisition system further comprising: a transmission part that transmits the position information acquired by the position information acquisition part and the soil quality information acquired by the soil quality information acquisition part; and a receiving part that is located away from the transmission part, and receives the position information and the soil quality information transmitted from the transmission part and inputs the position information and the soil quality information into the storage part like that in Harwell.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Nakano, Sherlock, and Uji with Harwell for the purpose of transmitting and receiving information. Therefore worksite machines and data could be secured (see Harwell Paras [0053]-[0054]).
With regards to Claim 10, Nakano, Sherlock, Uji and Harwell teach the limitations of claim 9. Nakano further teaches
an auxiliary transmission part that transmits the position information and the soil quality information stored in the storage part to another working machine on the worksite (See Fig. 2 communication device 26 (i.e. the auxiliary transmission part which is connected to the position detector 23 and the detection processing device 51, which contains the geological data acquisition unit (See Claim 1 above)) and Para[0092] “the work target OBP may be a work target which is worked on by at least one of the other excavator lot, a work machine different from the excavator 1 (i.e. another working machine)”); and
an auxiliary receiving part that is arranged at the another working machine, and receives the position information and the soil quality information transmitted from the auxiliary transmission part (See Para[0054] “The control system 50 of the excavator 1, the server 61, the mobile terminal device 64, and the control system 50ot (i.e. the auxiliary receiving part) of the other excavator lot are capable of performing data communication (i.e. the position information and the soil quality information) with one another over the communication network NTW (which is connected to the communication device 26, see Fig. 3).”).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regards to Claim 4, the prior art or any combination of prior art searched fails to teach the limitation of “outputs the acquisition signal when the working machine goes beyond a boundary circle falling within the reference circle and being concentric with the reference circle in traveling of the traveling part.” The prior art reference Uji fails to disclose a boundary circle or a reference circle, even though it teaches to output an acquisition signal. In addition, Nishizawa teaches a reference circle, but fails to disclose another circle concentric to the reference circle. Nowhere in the prior art does it recite the need for an acquisition signal to be outputted when the working machine goes beyond a boundary circle that is concentric to the reference circle in traveling of the traveling part. Thus, this limitation is not anticipated by nor obvious in view of the prior art of record and to one of ordinary skill in the art.
With regards to Claim 5, the prior art or any combination of prior art searched fails to teach the limitation of “outputs the acquisition signal when the working attachment extends beyond the reference circle.”
The prior art reference Uji fails to disclose a reference circle, even though it teaches to output an acquisition signal. In addition, Nishizawa teaches a reference circle, but fails to disclose that the working machine moves around in the reference circle. However, no reference teaches the limitation of outputting a signal when the working attachment extends beyond the reference circle. Thus, this limitation is not anticipated by nor obvious in view of the prior art of record and to one of ordinary skill in the art.
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 MOSTOFA AHMED HISHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. - 4 p.m. ET.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/MOSTOFA AHMED HISHAM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/YOSHIHISA ISHIZUKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights