DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claim 1-17, drawn to a mobile plant.
II. Claim 18, drawn to a method of deploying a mobile cone plant.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because.
Inventions II and I are related as process and apparatus for its practice. The inventions are distinct if it can be shown that either: (1) the process as claimed can be practiced by another and materially different apparatus or by hand, or (2) the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process. (MPEP § 806.05(e)). In this case the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process such as one without the step of providing a first front telescoping jack, second front telescoping jack, first rear telescoping jack, second rear telescoping jack, operating said cone crusher without using pins or clamps to reduce relative motions.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
(a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification;
(b) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter;
(c) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Greg Williams on 2/8/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of I, claims 1-17. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 18 is withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “nested portions” of claim 6, 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 6, 9, 10, 13, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 3, 10, 13 recite the limitation “portions thereof” in line 3. It is unclear what the “portions” is referring to.
Claim 6, 16 recite the limitation “said internal vibration” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation “an internal vibration” has not been previously cited. Is it supposed to be dependent upon claim 3 or 13?
Claim 9 is the same claim as claim 2.
Claim 10 is the same claim as claim 3.
Claim 6, 16 recite the limitation “portions” and “nested portions” and “said telescopic jack”. It is unclear what the portions are referring to. Also, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation “a telescopic jack” has not been previously cited.
All dependent claims of above-mentioned claims inherit all of the limitations of the above-mentioned claims. Thus, the claims are likewise rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite.
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 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma (CN 106269039) in view of Wissler (US 20050236824).
Regarding claim 1, Ma discloses a mobile plant (Fig. 1-5) comprising: a chassis (1); a group of dual wheels (Fig. 1: element 4. Wheels are on either side of the vehicle therefor 6 total-- 3 dual wheels) coupled to the chassis; a crusher (cone crusher 2) disposed on the chassis; and a plurality of jacks (6 ,7: “With reference to the accompanying drawings, practical method of this invention is as follows: the machine frame is connected with the traction seat wheel (supported by tractor, adjusting block support pin) has been detached from the tractor pulling the whole cone crusher movable, when moving to the working place. the towing vehicle from the machine frame, the jack is jacked up to whole frame, the wheel and the ground are separated, and then the supporting adjusting block is connected on the lower end of the supporting foot, at last put jack, the supporting adjusting block contacts the ground support, so as to locate the cone crusher; When the cone crusher transfer, through jack jacking frame, unloading the supporting adjusting block, progressively down the jack, the wheel landing, then pulling the cone crusher through the tractor, without repetitive disassembly and assembly, be directly transfer, transfer is flexible. movement of the wheel when the spring component has good shock absorption effect, the cone crusher has protection function.”).
Ma fails to disclose each of which is not oriented substantially perpendicular with respect to a longitudinal axis of said chassis.
Wissler teaches a vehicle leveling support jack system (Fig. 1-6) wherein comprising a frame support member (20), two telescoping jacks (outrigger unit 34, see [0029]) both in front and back (see Fig. 1) of the frame, the first front telescoping jack longitudinal axis and the second front telescoping jack longitudinal axis are upwardly and inwardly inclined (see Fig. 1-5). Wissler also teaches that the vehicle leveling support jack system levels the work vehicle so that the vehicle can be used over an increased variety of terrains ([0002], [0010], Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the jacks of Ma with the telescoping jack system as taught by Wissler above in order to use hydraulic jack system for quicker deployment and better stabilize the vehicle in variety of terrains ([0002], [0010], Fig. 3, Wissler).
Regarding claim 2, modified Ma teaches the mobile plant of claim 1 wherein one of said plurality of jacks is disposed between another of said plurality of jacks and said group of dual wheels. (see Fig. 1- location of the jacks, Ma)
Regarding claim 3, modified Ma teaches the mobile plant of claim 2 wherein one of said plurality of jacks is free of any structure (as modified, the jacks are hydraulic jacks- no structure added to reduce internal vibration) configured to reduce an internal vibration induced relative motion between portions thereof.
Regarding claim 4, modified Ma teaches the mobile plant of claim 1 wherein each of said plurality of jacks is a telescopic jack (as modified, see Fig. 6 of Wissler. 34 moves in and out inside the cylinder).
Regarding claim 5, modified Ma teaches the mobile plant of claim 4 wherein each of said plurality of jacks is a hydraulic jack. ([0030] Each unit 32 and 34 has a leveling cylinder 30 using a two-directional, i.e., double acting hydraulic system well known in the art., Wissler)
As best understood, regarding claim 6, modified Ma teaches the mobile plant of claim 4 wherein said internal vibration induced relative motion between portions thereof is between nested portions of said telescopic jack. (fluid internal to the jacks provide reduced vibration?)
Regarding claim 7, modified Ma teaches the mobile plant of claim 2 is free of any pins or clamps configured to reduce internal vibration induced relative motion in each of said plurality of jacks. (as modified by Wissler, no pins or clamps are there in hydraulic cylinders)
Regarding claim 9, see claim 2 rejection.
Regarding claim 10, see claim 3 rejection.
Regarding claim 8, Ma discloses a mobile plant (Fig. 1-5) comprising: a chassis (1); a group of wheels (Fig. 1: element 4. Wheels are on either side of the vehicle therefor 6 total-- 3 dual wheels) coupled to the chassis, a crusher (cone crusher 2) disposed on the chassis; and a plurality of jacks (6 ,7: “With reference to the accompanying drawings, practical method of this invention is as follows: the machine frame is connected with the traction seat wheel (supported by tractor, adjusting block support pin) has been detached from the tractor pulling the whole cone crusher movable, when moving to the working place. the towing vehicle from the machine frame, the jack is jacked up to whole frame, the wheel and the ground are separated, and then the supporting adjusting block is connected on the lower end of the supporting foot, at last put jack, the supporting adjusting block contacts the ground support, so as to locate the cone crusher; When the cone crusher transfer, through jack jacking frame, unloading the supporting adjusting block, progressively down the jack, the wheel landing, then pulling the cone crusher through the tractor, without repetitive disassembly and assembly, be directly transfer, transfer is flexible. movement of the wheel when the spring component has good shock absorption effect, the cone crusher has protection function.”).
Ma fails to disclose each of which is not oriented perpendicular with respect to a longitudinal axis of said chassis.
Wissler teaches a vehicle leveling support jack system (Fig. 1-6) wherein comprising a frame support member (20), two telescoping jacks (outrigger unit 34, see [0029]) both in front and back (see Fig. 1) of the frame, the first front telescoping jack longitudinal axis and the second front telescoping jack longitudinal axis are upwardly and inwardly inclined (see Fig. 1-5). Wissler also teaches that the vehicle leveling support jack system levels the work vehicle so that the vehicle can be used over an increased variety of terrains ([0002], [0010], Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the jacks of Ma with the telescoping jack system as taught by Wissler above in order to use hydraulic jack system for quicker deployment and better stabilize the vehicle in variety of terrains ([0002], [0010], Fig. 3, Wissler).
Regarding claim 11, Ma discloses a mobile plant (Fig. 1-5) comprising: a chassis (1); a group of dual wheels (Fig. 1: element 4. Wheels are on either side of the vehicle therefor 6 total-- 3 dual wheels) coupled to the chassis; a cone crusher (cone crusher 2) disposed on the chassis; and a plurality of jacks (6 ,7: “With reference to the accompanying drawings, practical method of this invention is as follows: the machine frame is connected with the traction seat wheel (supported by tractor, adjusting block support pin) has been detached from the tractor pulling the whole cone crusher movable, when moving to the working place. the towing vehicle from the machine frame, the jack is jacked up to whole frame, the wheel and the ground are separated, and then the supporting adjusting block is connected on the lower end of the supporting foot, at last put jack, the supporting adjusting block contacts the ground support, so as to locate the cone crusher; When the cone crusher transfer, through jack jacking frame, unloading the supporting adjusting block, progressively down the jack, the wheel landing, then pulling the cone crusher through the tractor, without repetitive disassembly and assembly, be directly transfer, transfer is flexible. movement of the wheel when the spring component has good shock absorption effect, the cone crusher has protection function.”).
Ma is silent to tandem dual wheels and the jacks each of which is not oriented substantially perpendicular with respect to a longitudinal axis of said chassis.
Wissler teaches a vehicle leveling support jack system (Fig. 1-6) wherein comprising a frame support member (20), two telescoping jacks (outrigger unit 34, see [0029]) both in front and back (see Fig. 1) of the frame, the first front telescoping jack longitudinal axis and the second front telescoping jack longitudinal axis are upwardly and inwardly inclined (see Fig. 1-5). Wissler also teaches that the vehicle leveling support jack system levels the work vehicle so that the vehicle can be used over an increased variety of terrains ([0002], [0010], Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the jacks of Ma with the telescoping jack system as taught by Wissler above in order to use hydraulic jack system for quicker deployment and better stabilize the vehicle in variety of terrains ([0002], [0010], Fig. 3, Wissler).
Examiner takes official notice that the tandem wheels on a work vehicle is well known feature to support the heavy weight of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the wheels of Ma to have tandem wheels to support the heavy wheel of Ma’s working vehicle.
Regarding claim 12, see claim 2 rejection.
Regarding claim 13, see claim 3 rejection.
Regarding claim 14, see claim 4 rejection.
Regarding claim 15, see claim 5 rejection.
As best understood, regarding claim 16, see claim 6 rejection.
Regarding claim 17, see claim 7 rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 3409235, WO 9200147 teach similar mobile plants.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOBBY YEONJIN KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1866. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5 pm.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached on (571) 270-1477. 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.
/BOBBY YEONJIN KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3725