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 .
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 04/29/2026.
Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are currently pending and have been examined below. Claim 12 has been cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, 13-14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choi (KR 20160042841).
Claim 1
(Choi discloses) A system (figures 1-6) for controlling access to a cavity (cavity shown in figure 1) recessed below a surface (Annotated figure 3 below) during ground operations, the system comprising:
a cover (10) configured to span the cavity and to support at least a portion of a weight of a vehicle (the cover 10 can support the weight of any vehicles that pass by the cover and the surface), wherein the cover comprises one or more wheels (11) on one side of the cover (right side of the cover) and a second pivot axis (Annotated figure 3 below) on an opposite side of the cover (left side of the cover), and wherein the surface is adapted to engage the vehicle (this is true when a vehicle passes by the surface similar to applicant’s disclosure on par. 39);
a first lift arm (40) rotationally coupled to the cover at the second pivot axis (figures 3-4); and
a support structure (30) comprising a first pivot axis (Annotated figure 4 below), wherein the first lift arm is rotationally coupled to the support structure at the first pivot axis (Annotated figure 4 below), wherein the support structure, via the first lift arm, is configured to move the cover between a generally horizontal orientation in a fully closed position (figure 2) and a generally horizontal orientation in a fully open position (figure 4), and wherein the one or more wheels roll along the surface while the cover moves to and from the fully open position (figures 2-4).
PNG
media_image1.png
339
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 3
PNG
media_image2.png
359
650
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 4
Claim 2
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein the support structure is configured to move the cover between the fully open position and the fully closed position in less than 2 minutes (intended use; the cover can be manually operated to close or open in less than 2 minutes).
Claim 4
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein the first pivot axis is spaced away from the second pivot axis, and wherein rotation of the first lift arm about the first pivot axis in a first direction (clockwise direction) lifts the cover out of the cavity and moves the cover horizontally away from the cavity (figures 2-4).
Claim 5
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 4, wherein rotation of the first lift arm about the first pivot axis in a second direction (counter clockwise direction) moves the cover horizontally toward the cavity and lowers the cover into the cavity, and wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction (figures 2-4).
Claim 6
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein the support structure is configured to move the cover from the fully closed position to the fully open position in less than 2 minutes (intended use; the cover can be manually operated to close or open in less than 2 minutes).
Claim 7
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein the support structure comprises a frame (Annotated figure 3 above), and wherein the first lift arm is rotationally coupled to the frame at the first pivot axis that is spaced away from both a first end and a second end of the first lift arm (Annotated figure 3 above).
Claim 8
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 7, wherein the first end of the first lift arm is rotationally coupled to the opposite side of the cover at the second pivot axis (Annotated figure 3 above).
Claim 10
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 8, wherein rotation of the first lift arm about the first pivot axis moves the cover between the fully closed position and either a partially open position or the fully open position (figures 2-4).
Claim 11
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 10, wherein the fully closed position locates the cover vertically above the cavity (figure 2), and wherein the fully open position locates the cover horizontally spaced away from the cavity (figure 4).
Claim 13
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 7, further comprising a second lift arm (figures 5-6 show two lift arms 40; the second lift arm is the other arm 40), wherein the second lift arm is rotationally coupled to the frame at the first pivot axis that is spaced away from both a first end and a second end of the second lift arm (the same first end and second end as shown in Annotated figure 3 above; figure 6 also shows both first lift arm and second lift arm pivoting at the same first pivot axis).
Claim 14
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 13, wherein the first end of the first lift arm and the first end of the second lift arm are rotationally coupled to the opposite side of the cover at the second pivot axis (Annotated figure 3 above).
Claim 16
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 14, wherein rotation of the first lift arm and the second lift arm about the first pivot axis moves the cover between the fully closed position and either a partially open position or the fully open position (figures 2-4).
Claim 17
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 16, wherein the fully closed position locates the cover vertically above the cavity (figure 2).
Claim 18
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 16, wherein the fully open position locates the cover horizontally spaced away from the cavity (figure 4).
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.
Claims 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi, as applied to claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, 13-14, and 16-18 above, in view of Li et al. (CN 107100203) (hereinafter “Li”).
Claim 9
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 8.
Choi fails to disclose a first motor fixedly coupled to the frame and configured to rotate the first lift arm about the first pivot axis in either a clockwise or a counterclockwise direction.
(However, Li teaches) A system (Li figures 1-2) for controlling access to a cavity (cavity shown in Li figure 2) further comprising a first motor (10; Excerpt 1 from page 4 below) fixedly coupled to a frame (1) and configured to actuate a first lift arm (5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the system of Choi with the motor of Li for automating the opening and closing of the cover therefore providing ease of operation to the users.
PNG
media_image3.png
125
760
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 1
Claim 15
(Choi discloses) The system of claim 14.
Choi fails to disclose:
(I) a first motor fixedly coupled to the frame and configured to rotate the first lift arm about the first pivot axis in either a clockwise or a counterclockwise direction; and
(ii) a second motor fixedly coupled to the frame and configured to rotate the second lift arm about the first pivot axis in either the clockwise or the counterclockwise direction.
(However, Li teaches) A system (Li figures 1-2) for controlling access to a cavity (cavity shown in Li figure 2) further comprising a first motor (10; Excerpt 1 from page 4 above) fixedly coupled to a frame (1) and configured to actuate a first lift arm (5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide each of the first lift arm and second lift arm of Choi with a motor similar to the teachings of Li for automating the opening and closing of the cover therefore providing ease of operation to the users.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 19-21 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art Viner (US 4433505) and Choi seem to teach most of the limitations of claim 19.
However, the independent claim 19 was amended to recite “wherein the surface is adapted to engage the vehicle”. Although the surface (interpreted as the surface of the track 17 in figure 1) is installed in the vehicle, it is not capable of engaging a vehicle similar to how the surface of applicant's invention engages a vehicle.
According from par. 0039 of applicant’s original disclosure. "FIG. 2 is a representative perspective view of a system 10 of robotic arms 100a-f for performing a ground operation on an aircraft 40 on a surface 6")” such that the surface 6 engages a vehicle by supporting the weight of the vehicle on its surface. This feature is not taught by Viner therefore places claim 19 and its dependents in condition for allowance.
Regarding claim 3, examiner considered providing the system of Choi (KR 20160042841) with a robotic arm, however decided that such combination does not provide any benefits to the manhole cover of Choi other than mere hindsight into applicant’s invention, this decision led to placing claim 3 in condition for allowance. Lastly, Choi fails to anticipate claim 19 as the independent claim also recites “stowing a robotic arm in a stowed position in the cavity with a cover disposed over the cavity” which is not taught nor reasonable to combine to reject in light of Choi.
Further modifications such that any of the prior art meets the claimed limitations would require significant amount of hindsight and/or piecemeal rejection such that examiner finds them unreasonable to apply and reject the claims as recited.
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.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument directed to the claim objection has been considered and the objection was withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights