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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 and 3-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munnekehoff (US7070061B1) in view of Englert (US20220297984A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Munnekehoff discloses an overhead crane assembly (1; Figures 2-3) and method for moving a load (20) comprising: at least one support beam (22); operatively engaging a translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) moveable relative to the at least one support beam (22); a hoist assembly (6, 8) operatively engaged with the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) and having a hoist mechanism (6) and a hoist rope (14) adapted to be engaged with the load (20), wherein the hoist assembly (6, 8) is adapted to suspend a load (20) therefrom; and a movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) operably engaged with the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) and the hoist assembly (6, 8), the movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) including an inclinometer (24) engaged with the hoist rope of the hoist assembly (6, 8) extending between the hoist assembly (6, 8) and the load (20); and wherein the movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) is operable to initiate movement of the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) upon application of a physical force to the load (20) by a hand of a human operator (28; column 5, lines 43-59); and moving the load (20) relative to the at least one support beam (22) via the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b), but fails to teach wherein the inclinometer being located at a position remote from a hoist mechanism of the hoist assembly.
Englert teaches a similar overhead crane assembly and further teaches wherein the inclinometer (3; Figure 1) being located at a position remote from a hoist mechanism (¶0069, trolley 6 provided with a hoist) of the hoist assembly (6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the overhead crane assembly of Englert to include the inclinometer as taught by Englert in order to provide more accurate and precise load angular position measurements.
Regarding claim 3, Munnekehoff discloses wherein the movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) further includes a processor (47, 39, 40; Figures 1-2) provided with programming configured to control the movement of the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b), but fails to teach wherein the processor being separate and spaced apart from the inclinometer.
Englert teaches a similar overhead crane assembly and further teaches wherein the processor (2; Figure 1) being separate and spaced apart from the inclinometer (3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the overhead crane assembly of Englert to include the processor as taught by Englert in order to provide easy and safe access for maintenance.
Regarding claims 4-5, Munnekehoff discloses
wherein the processor (47, 39, 40) is configured to receive signals from the inclinometer (24);
wherein actuation of the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) is initiated by the processor (47, 39, 40) when a signal from the inclinometer (24) indicates that the hoist rope (14) is oriented at an angle relative to Normal (column 5, line 43 – column 6, line 32).
Regarding claims 6-10 and 14, Munnekehoff discloses wherein the at least one support beam (22) comprises at least one runway beam (left and right beams 22; Figure 2) extending in a longitudinal direction; and wherein the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) includes an end truck (23b; column 6, lines 45-50, wheel and disk traveling mechanism at ends of bridge 4 acting on track 2) moveable longitudinally along the at least one runway beam, and the end truck (23b) is motorized;
wherein the at least one support beam (22) further comprises a bridge (4) oriented transverse to the at least one runway beam (left and right beams 22), and wherein the bridge (4) is engaged with the end truck (23b);
wherein the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) further comprises a trolley (8) movable along the bridge (4);
wherein the hoist assembly (6, 8) is operably engaged with the bridge (4) via the trolley (8);
wherein the trolley (8) includes a motor (23a) which is actuated to move the trolley (8) along the bridge (4) only after the human operator (28) applies a pushing (30) or pulling (36) physical force to the load (20) suspended from the hoist assembly (6, 8).
Regarding claim 11, Munnekehoff discloses a movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) for an overhead crane assembly (1) comprising: an inclinometer (24) engaged with a hoist rope (14) extending between a hoist assembly (6, 8) of the overhead crane assembly (1) and a load (20) to be moved; a motor (23a; 23b) provided on a translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) of the overhead crane assembly (1); a processor (47, 39, 40) operably engaged with the inclinometer (24) and the motor (23a; 23b); wherein the processor (47, 39, 40) is configured to receive signals from the inclinometer (24); and wherein the processor (47, 39, 40) is configured to actuate the motor (23a; 23b) upon receipt of a first signal from the inclinometer (24) indicating that the hoist rope (14) is oriented at an angle relative to Normal (column 2, line 66 – column 3, line 12, sensor control signal provided with angle of deflection to start drives 23a,23b), but fails to teach wherein the inclinometer being located at a position remote from a hoist mechanism of the hoist assembly.
Englert teaches a similar overhead crane assembly and further teaches wherein the inclinometer (3; Figure 1) being located at a position remote from a hoist mechanism (¶0069, trolley 6 provided with a hoist) of the hoist assembly (6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the overhead crane assembly of Englert to include the inclinometer as taught by Englert in order to provide more accurate and precise load angular position measurements.
Regarding claim 12, Munnekehoff discloses wherein the processor (47, 39, 40) is configured to shut off the motor (23a; 23b) upon receipt of a second signal from the inclinometer (24) indicating that the hoist rope (14) is aligned with Normal (column 3, lines 25-32; sensor control signal provided with zero force and no angle deflection to stop drives 23a,23b).
Regarding claims 15-19, Munnekehoff discloses wherein actuating the movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) comprises moving the hoist rope (14) of the hoist assembly (6, 8) from being aligned with Normal to being oriented at an angle to Normal (Figure 3);
wherein actuating the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) includes starting a motor (23a; 23b) provided on the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b);
wherein engaging the movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) comprises: measuring an angle of the hoist rope (14) relative to Normal with the inclinometer (24);
deactivating the movement assist system (23a, 23b, 24, 47, 39, 40) by halting the application of physical force to the load (20) with the hand of the human operator (28);
halting movement of the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) by shutting off a motor (23a; 23b) provided on the translation assembly (4, 23a, 23b) when the application of physical force to the load (20) is halted (column 3, lines 25-32).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/22/2026 with respect to claims 1, 3, 11, and 13 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1, 3, 11, and 13, in pages 8-11 and first paragraph in page 12, the applicant argued that the disclosure of Munnekehoff fails to teach wherein the inclinometer is engaged with the hoist rope and being located at a position remote from the hoist mechanism; and wherein the processor is provided with a programming configured to control movement of the translation assembly and being separate and spaced apart from the inclinometer.
The examiner construed that the disclosure of Munnekehoff teaches wherein the inclinometer is engaged with the hoist rope and wherein the processor is provided with a programming configured to control movement of the translation assembly. The examiner agrees that the disclosure of Munnekehoff fails to teach the inclinometer being located at a position remote from the hoist mechanism and the processor being separate and spaced apart from the inclinometer. However, the examiner construed that the disclosure of Englert teaches the limitation of the inclinometer being located at a position remote from the hoist mechanism and the processor being separate and spaced apart from the inclinometer, as described above. Thus, contradicting to applicant’s assertions, such amendment does not overcome the prior 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 HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm 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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights