DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed May 5, 2025 for the above identified patent application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ericsson (USPub 2011/0248476).
Ericsson teaches a vehicle having a frame (1), a first running gear (7-9) and a second running gear (7-9), wherein the two running gear are arranged on opposite sides of the frame (Fig. 2) and are mounted so as to be displaceable relative to the frame by means of hydraulic cylinders (51) for changing the track width, wherein each hydraulic cylinder comprises a component (63) fixed to the frame and at least one component (54,72) which can be displaced relative to the frame, and the first and second running gear are each fastened to the displaceable component of the hydraulic cylinders, characterized in that the displaceable component of the hydraulic cylinders is guided so as to be displaceable in a guide (54) on the frame, wherein the guide is designed to transmit forces between the displaceable component and the frame transversely to the displacement direction of the displaceable component.
Claim 2: Ericsson teaches in that the guide (53) in the frame is a guide bore which is in direct guiding contact with an outer peripheral surface of the displaceable component (54).
Claim 3: Ericsson teaches the component (63) fixed to the frame is formed by a piston rod (77), and the displaceable component is formed by a cylinder (78) pushed onto the piston rod.
Claim 4: Ericsson teaches that a stop element (such as the end surface of the cylinder, or 14) is provided for limiting the displacement distance of the displaceable component.
Claim 11: Ericsson teaches (Fig. 1) the first and the second running gear are a wheeled running gear.
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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson (USPub 2011/0248476), as applied to claim 3 above.
Ericsson teaches (Fig. 2) the hydraulic cylinders are designed as double-acting hydraulic cylinders ([0036]), wherein guide elements (53), which are spaced apart for relative displaceability and for force transmission between the cylinder and the piston rod. Ericsson does not clearly show the seal arrangement of the hydraulic cylinder. However, it is understood the hydraulic cylinder or Ericsson is configured with spaced-apart seals (inherent to provide pressure chambers), wherein a first pressure chamber (inherent in a double acting cylinder) is formed between a front end of the piston rod and a sealed off end region of the cylinder, and a second pressure chamber (inherent in a double acting cylinder) is delimited by the two spaced-apart seals, an inner wall of the cylinder, and a peripheral surface of the piston rod. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one in the art at the time of the effective filing of the claimed device to configure the hydraulic cylinder(s) of Ericsson with the claimed seal and pressure chambers, as was notoriously known in the hydraulic art, motivation being the form a simple cylinder capable of producing force in oppose directions.
Claim(s) 10, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson (USPub 2011/0248476), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Di Biase (USP 11,535,317).
Ericsson does not teach a remotely controlled vehicle for coupling at least one attachment. However, configuring a vehicle to operate remotely was well known. For example, Di Biase teaches a radio-controlled vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing of the claimed device, to configure the vehicle of Ericsson to operate remotely, as taught by Di Biase, motivation being to eliminate the need for a vehicle operator.
Ericsson does not teach each running gear having a drive motor, at least one energy source connected to the drive motors of the running gear. Di Biase teaches a vehicle having hydraulic motors driven by an engine/hydraulic pump (6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing of the claimed device, to configure the vehicle of Ericsson with motors driven by an engine/pump, as taught by Di Biase, motivation being to provide a predetermined torque to independently drive each running gear.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15 and 16 are allowed.
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the protecting and supporting means (52) is only employed to absorb forces acting in a direction transversely to the longitudinal direction of the hydraulic cylinder 51, and does not act "to transmit forces between the displaceable component and the frame transversely to the displacement direction of the displaceable component" as required by claim 1.
Referring to claim 1, it is acknowledged the prior art must teach “the guide is designed to transmit forces between the displaceable component and the frame transversely to the displacement direction of the displaceable component.” Ericsson teaches the hydraulic cylinders having a displaceable component (54), a guide (53) attached to the hydraulic cylinder at a first end (61) and connected to the vehicle frame (1) at a second end (55), the guide having a sliding bushing (76), an outer surface (74) of the displaceable component (54) is guided by the sliding bushing (76), the guide (53) is designed to transmit forces between the displaceable component (54) and the frame (1) transversely to the displacement direction of the displaceable component (72). It is understood that the guide (53) is configured to transmit any force, acting in a transverse direction, between the displaceable component (54) and the frame (1).
In view of the above, the claims fail to preclude the track width arrangement of Ericsson. The claims stand rejected as described above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 WILLIAM C JOYCE whose telephone number is (571)272-7107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-270-7778. 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.
/WILLIAM C JOYCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights