DETAILED ACTION
This action is a non-final, first office action on the merits in response to applicant’s communication filed on 3/21/2024, wherein claims 1-14 are currently pending.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) based upon an application filed in Japan. The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 2023-057224, filed on March 31, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/21/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
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 “protruding members attached to outer masts 5” which encompass the claimed “motion conversion mechanism” 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 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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 1 invokes 112(f) describing a “load handling device that performs load handling,” “a movement device that performs traveling operation,” “a motion conversion mechanism that opens,” and “a lifting/lowering member.”
It is understood in view of applicant’s specification at paragraph [0030], “the load handling device E1 includes a mast M (the mast M includes inner masts 4 which support the lift bracket 3 and are lifted and lowered, and outer masts 5 which guide the inner masts 4 so that the inner masts 4 can be lifted and lowered, described in paragraph [0031])… the fork 2 on which a pallet P and the load Q shown in FIG. 2 are placed, and a lift bracket 3, shown in FIGS. 3 to 5, which supports the fork 2 and is moved up and down along the mast M” and equivalents thereof. In regard to the claimed “movement device,” it is understood in view of applicant’s drawing/figure 1 that the movement device element E2 is a wheel.
It is further understood in view of applicant’s reference in the specification to Motion Conversion Mechanism A Option 1 (Lifting/Lowering Motion) that said mechanism includes a “Link Mechanism” and further identifies the components of the Link Mechanism to include: guide bodies 9, operation arm 10, slide arm 11, runner body RS, outer runner body RO, support axis S, and guide rails GR1-GR3.
It is further understood in view of applicant’s reference in the specification to Motion Conversion Mechanism A Option 2 (Tilt Motion) that said mechanism includes the corresponding structure: protruding members attached to outer masts 5, operation arm 10, support axis S, second end portion 10B, and slide arm 11.
It is further understood in view of applicant’s reference in the specification to Motion Conversion Mechanism A Option 3 (Front-Back Mast Movement) that said mechanism includes the corresponding structure: wire 37 or belt, outer runner body RO, guide rail GR, and outer mast 5.
The specification also mentions the motion conversion mechanism is a winding transmission device, with the following structure: sheet body N, roller 15, pulley 16, large-diameter pulley 17A, small-diameter pulley 17B, wire 18A, and wire 18B.
It is also understood in view of the applicant’s specification at paragraph [0030] that the “Lifting/lowering members H included in the load handling device E1 include the fork 2, the lift bracket 3, the inner masts 4, a support frame body 8 which supports guide bodies 9 described later, and the like.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-14 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “the motion conversion mechanism opens the opening/closing body using one of: a lifting/lowering motion of a lifting/lowering member included in the load handling device; a tilting motion, of an outer mast supporting the lifting/lowering member, by a tilt cylinder included in the load handling device; and front-back movement of the outer mast included in the load handling device.” Although the claim recites the optional “one of,” it appears all three “lifting/lowering” members are necessary as currently written whereby the second and third option seem to depend from the first and is thus indefinite. Claims 2-14 all depend on claim 1 and are therefore also indefinite.
Claim 7 is further rejected because of the following informalities: Claim 7 recites “the door is provided with at an upper portion.” This appears to be a typo, but clarification is requested as it is currently indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
The prior art of record has been carefully considered. At present, the examiner has not identified prior art that teaches or renders obvious the claimed coordinated forklift cover actuation arrangement. However, claims 1-14 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 for the reasons set forth above. Upon correction of the noted indefiniteness issues, the application may be in condition for allowance.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fathi Abdelsalam whose telephone number is (571) 270-0380. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 10 AM to 6 PM 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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571) 270-5565. 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.
/ERNESTO A SUAREZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/FATHI K. ABDELSALAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights