DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment/Remarks
The 12.10.2025 amendments to the claims are entered. Claims 1 and 3-4 are amended. No claims are withdrawn, canceled, or newly added. Claims 1-5 remain pending.
Applicant’s 12.10.2025 remarks have been fully considered. The Examiner’s response to the various section of the remarks is as below.
Regarding the § 112(b) Rejections
The rejection of claim 3 is withdrawn in light of the amendments made.
The rejection of claim 4 is withdrawn in light of the amendments and arguments made. After review of [0083] of the specification, the 12.10.2025 Remarks, and the amendment, the examiner now understands that the acceleration of the vehicle is different from the acceleration of the outside of the vehicle that has not accelerated. The examiner thanks Applicant for explaining and amending the claims to improve their clarity.
Regarding the Prior Art Rejections
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but 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.
In the interest of compact prosecution, the examiner wishes to further explain how the prior art reads on claim 1. Amended claim 1 states that a predetermined posture enables the excavated material to be mounted rearward by one tilt of the bucket. In light of the teaching reference introduced below, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a tilt of the bucket would at least enable the excavated material to be mounted rearward.
In other words, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “enabling the work object . . . to be mounted to a rearward side of the bucket by one tilt operation of the bucket” encompasses the idea that the excavated material could be enabled to move to the rear of the bucket by a tilt operation.
It is the examiner’s opinion that if the claim were amended to disclose that the predetermined posture represent an angle, posture, etc. that requires the excavated material to be shifted to the back of the bucket by one tilt operation, such an amendment would at least overcome the art of record.
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 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170037594 A1 to Wada, Minoru et al. (“Wada”) in light of How to Operate a Wheel Loader (ep. 065), a video made by the Youtube channel Heavy Metal Learning, posted 06.19.2018 (URL in the attached PTO-892).
Regarding claim 1, Wada teaches a wheel loader comprising (Wada FIG.1):
a lift arm attached to a front portion of a vehicle body (Wada FIG.1: Boom 31.), so as to rotate in an upward and downward direction with respect to the vehicle body (Wada [0035]: “The boom 31, which includes right and left pair of booms, is pivotally supported to be vertically swingable relative to the front vehicle body frame 21.”);
a bucket attached to a tip part of the lift arm (Wada FIG.1: Bucket 32.), so as to excavate a work object by a tilt operation in which the bucket rotates in an upward direction with respect to the lift arm and tilts rearward toward the vehicle body (Wada [0034]: “ . . . a bucket 32 vertically pivotally supported by the boom 31 . . . ”);
lift arm cylinders for driving the lift arm (Wada FIG.5, [0065]: Boom is driven by boom cylinder 36.);
a bucket cylinder for driving the bucket (Wada FIG.1, [0037]: “A bucket cylinder 34 is pivotally supported at an upper end of the bell crank 33.”);
a lift arm solenoid control valve configured to control the lift arm cylinders (Wada [0062]: Boom solenoid proportional pressure control valve 27.);
a bucket solenoid control valve configured to control the bucket cylinder (Wada [0064]: Solenoid proportional pressure control valve 25.); and
a controller configured to control the lift arm solenoid control valve and the bucket solenoid control valve, respectively (Wada FIG.5: Working Equipment Controller 10.), wherein
the wheel loader comprises:
a pressure sensor configured to detect a bottom pressure of the lift arm cylinders (Wada FIG.6: Boom-bottom pressure sensor 460.); and
a bucket posture sensor configured to detect a posture of the bucket (Wada FIG.6: Bucket angle sensor 450.), the controller is configured to:
in a case where the bottom pressure detected by the pressure sensor reaches a first pressure threshold, output a command signal relating to a lift arm lifting operation to the lift arm solenoid control valve, the first pressure threshold corresponding to a bottom pressure of the lift arm cylinders in a state where the lift arm is not operating and also the bucket is touching the work object (Wada [0095]: “When the bucket 32 is thrust into the object to be excavated, and the boom-bottom pressure and the vehicle speed satisfy auto lift conditions, the working equipment controller 10 performs auto lift to automatically lift the boom 31.”; Wada [0094]: “When the bucket 32 brought into contact with the ground with the bottom surface 43G of the bucket 32 being horizontal is thrust into the object to be excavated by an operator's operation . . ..” Understood that the bucket being described as horizontal before the lifting operation performed at least implicitly teaches that the arm is not being operated.);
in a case where the posture of the bucket detected by the bucket posture sensor is a posture in which the bucket is tilted forward more than that in a predetermined posture (Wada [0094]: “When the bucket 32 brought into contact with the ground with the bottom surface 43G of the bucket 32 being horizontal is thrust into the object to be excavated by an operator's operation . . ..” The disclosed auto lift and auto tilt processes begin with the bucket at horizontal, broadly interpreted as a case where bucket posture is more forward than a predetermined posture.).
Wada does not appear to expressly teach the predetermined posture enabling the work object as excavated to be mounted to a rearward side of the bucket by one tilt operation of the bucket.
However, Heavy Metal Learning depicts that when the bucket of a front loader is tilted back, soil shifts to the rearward of the bucket at 11:15-11:27.
In light of Heavy Metal Learning, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized before the effective filing date of the present invention that tilting back of the bucket, understood in Wada as the lift and tilt commands until the bucket is in the tilt-end state, would have resulted in enabling the work object as excavated to be mounted to a rearward side of the bucket by one tilt operation of the bucket.
Wada in light of Heavy Metal Learning further teaches to keep outputting the command signal relating to the lift arm lifting operation to the lift arm solenoid control valve (Wada [0106]-[0107]: Understood that the command signal to lift the boom is kept outputting until lift end conditions are met, while the bucket is still not in the predetermined posture.) and also output a command signal relating to the tilt operation of the bucket to the bucket solenoid control valve until the bucket is in the predetermined posture (Wada [0118]-[0119]: “Thus, when the tilt-end state is detected during the auto tilt motion (NO in Step S11), the determination result is “YES” in Step S12.” Tilt-end state disclosed as measured by the bucket angle sensor 450, the end state taken as the predetermined posture. Thus, tilt operation is continued until this posture is met.); and
in a case where the posture of the bucket detected by the bucket posture sensor reaches the predetermined posture, output a command signal relating to a full tilt operation of the bucket to the bucket solenoid control valve (Wada [0097]: “When it is detected that the bucket 32 is in a tilt-end state based on a tilt angle of the bucket 32 . . . the working equipment controller 10 terminates the automatic excavation work.” Command to terminate automatic excavation taken as the signal, relate to the full tilt by merit of being able to be sent when full tilt is achieved.).
Regarding claim 2, Wada in light of Heavy Metal Learning further teaches the wheel loader according to claim 1, further comprising a lift arm posture sensor configured to detect a posture of the lift arm (Wada [0075], FIG.5: Boom angle sensor 440.), wherein
the controller is configured to:
in a case where a start condition that a lifting amount of the lift arm based on the posture of the lift arm detected by the lift arm posture sensor is equal to or more than a predetermined lifting amount threshold (Wada [0107]: “After the boom lift is started in Step S6, the working equipment controller 10 determines whether or not auto lift termination conditions are satisfied (Step S7). Specifically, when . . . the boom angle of the boom 31 is increased to a determination value or more . . . .” See also FIG. 8.) or the bottom pressure of the lift arm cylinders detected by the pressure sensor is equal to or more than a second pressure threshold which is more than the first pressure threshold is satisfied (Wada [0112]: “Specifically, the operating state detecting unit 110 of the working equipment controller 10 determines that the auto tilt start conditions are satisfied when the boom-bottom pressure is increased to the second threshold or more . . ..”), start outputting the command signal relating to the tilt operation of the bucket to the bucket solenoid control valve ([0114]: “When the determination result is “YES” in Step S9, the working equipment controlling unit 140 of the working equipment controller 10 outputs a control signal to the solenoid proportional pressure control valve 25 so that the tilt of the bucket 32 is started (Step S10).”);
in a case where a stop condition that a rearward tilt amount of the bucket based on the posture of the bucket detected by the bucket posture sensor is equal to or more than a predetermined rearward tilt amount threshold is satisfied ([Wada 0118]: “Specifically, when it is detected that the bucket 32 is in the tilt-end state . . . the operating state detecting unit 110 of the working equipment controller 10 determines that the auto tilt conditions are satisfied. It should be noted that when the bucket 32 is in the “tilt-end state”, the bucket cylinder 34 is extended at a maximum, and thus the bucket 32 cannot be further tilted. The tilt-end state is thus detectable by, for instance, the bucket angle sensor 450.”), stop outputting the command signal relating to the tilt operation of the bucket to the bucket solenoid control valve ([0119]: “Thus, when the tilt-end state is detected during the auto tilt motion (NO in Step S11), the determination result is “YES” in Step S12. Therefore, the working equipment controller 10 terminates the control under the automatic excavation mode.”); and
until the bucket is in the predetermined posture, based on the start condition and the stop condition, repeatedly start and stop outputting the command signal relating to the tilt operation of the bucket to the bucket solenoid control valve (Wada FIG.8: See S9-S14. Understood that auto-tilt is started (S9) and stopped repeatedly until auto tilt termination conditions are satisfied (S14).).
Regarding claim 5, Wada in view of Heavy Metal Learning further teaches the wheel loader according to claim 1, further comprising a forward and rearward switching device configured to switch a traveling of the vehicle body between a forward traveling and a rearward traveling (Wada [0079]: “ . . . the FR information indicating a travel direction of the wheel loader 1 (i.e., forward or reverse) selected using an FR lever 490 . . . ”), wherein
the controller is configured to, upon acquiring a signal relating to the rearward traveling (Wada [0097]: “When it is detected that . . . the wheel loader 1 is operated by an operator to travel not forward but rearward or be in a neutral state, the working equipment controller 10 terminates the automatic excavation work.”) or a signal relating to stop from the forward and rearward switching device while outputting the command signal relating to the lifting operation of the lift arm to the lift arm solenoid control valve (Use of “or” requires consideration of only one of the two options. Here, the first option is broadly interpreted as requiring only a rearward operation to issue the command signal while the second option is broadly interpreted as requiring a neutral operation while the lifting operation command is being output.), output the command signal relating to the full tilt operation of the bucket to the bucket solenoid control valve (Wada [0097]: “When it is detected that . . . the wheel loader 1 is operated by an operator to travel not forward but rearward or be in a neutral state, the working equipment controller 10 terminates the automatic excavation work.”).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170037594 A1 to Wada, Minoru et al. (“Wada”) as applied to claim 2 above, in light of Heavy Metal Learning, and further in view of US 20130103247 A1 to Ogawa, Kouji (“Ogawa”).
Regarding claim 3, Wada in light of Heavy Metal Learning teaches the wheel loader according to claim 2.
The embodiment of Wada used to reject Claims 1 and 2 does not appear to expressly teach further comprising an acceleration sensor configured to detect an acceleration of the vehicle body.
However, an alternative embodiment of Wada teaches further comprising an acceleration sensor configured to detect an acceleration of the vehicle body (Wada [0146]: “The horizontal reaction force detector may be the vehicle speed sensor 500 for detecting the vehicle speed, a device for detecting deceleration (acceleration) . . . ” Wada further teaches use of the acceleration detection device to trigger automatic excavation, see [0145].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have combined the front loader automatic lift equipment controller that uses a lift cylinder bottom pressure threshold to determine when to begin automatic lift taught by the previous embodiment of Wada with the front loader automatic lift equipment controller that uses a horizontal reaction force threshold to determine when to begin automatic lift taught by the alternative embodiment of Wada. Doing so would have improved the reliability of beginning automatic lift operations by providing an alternative means for beginning automatic lift if the signal from the pressure sensor is not received or is faulty.
This combination does not appear to expressly teach the controller is configured to:
store, as a reference posture, the posture of the lift arm detected by the lift arm posture sensor when the acceleration of the vehicle body detected by the acceleration sensor turns to increase from a minimum value; and
determine whether the lifting amount of the lift arm which increases from the reference posture as stored is equal to or more than the predetermined lifting amount threshold.
However, Ogawa teaches the controller is configured to:
store, as a reference posture, the posture of the lift arm detected by the lift arm posture sensor (Ogawa [0057]: “Also, when teaching mode is selected, the driving controller 120 . . . stores generated trajectory data in the data storage unit 150. . . . the driving controller 120 stores cylinder length data of the boom, arm, and bucket driven by the driving unit 140, or angle data for each link in the boom, arm, and bucket in the data storage unit 150.” The Examiner notes that Ogawa teaches the teaching system may be implemented on a wheel loader in [0053].); and
determine whether the lifting amount of the lift arm which increases from the reference posture as stored (Ogawa [0057]: Boom angle taken as the lift amount.) is equal to or more than the predetermined lifting amount threshold (Wada [0107]: “After the boom lift is started in Step S6, the working equipment controller 10 determines whether or not auto lift termination conditions are satisfied (Step S7). Specifically, when . . . the boom angle of the boom 31 is increased to a determination value or more . . . .” APOSITA would have understood that in the combination below, the angle measured by Ogawa would have been compared to the threshold of Wada.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have combined the control system for wheel loaders that performs predetermined motions with the lift arm and bucket taught by Wada in light of Heavy Metal Learning with the control system for wheel loaders that records a motion in a teaching mode for later playback taught by Ogawa. Doing so would have allowed an operator to record preset motions and loader postures he has to use often for automated playback, reducing workload and operator fatigue.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the above combination of Wada in light of Heavy Metal Learning and further in view of Ogawa further teaches storing the reference posture of the lift when the acceleration of the vehicle body detected by the acceleration sensor turns to increase from a minimum value (APOSITA would have understood that in the above combination, if the teaching mode of Ogawa were in use at a time in the digging process where the loader underwent acceleration (for example, when slowing to thrust the bucket into the target as shown in FIG.11.), it would necessarily record the posture of the lift arm while the loader body was undergoing nonzero (more than a minimum) acceleration.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for marking allowable subject matter:
None of the prior art of record appears to teach or disclose, alone or in combination, the following limitation:
“the controller is configured to:
by subtracting a product of a vehicle weight of the vehicle body and an acceleration of the vehicle body from a product of an output torque of the torque converter and a rotational speed of the torque converter, calculate an applied force applied from an outside to the vehicle body that has not accelerated.”
This limitation is not expressed in any teaching. The closest prior art, Wada, teaches calculating a force applied from an outside that has not accelerated by measuring the bottom pressure in the cylinder of the front loader. However, Wada does not teach taking a product of vehicle weight and acceleration and subtracting it from the product of output torque and rotational speed of the torque converter.
A patent is a right to exclude practice of the claimed invention. Claim 4, while allowing Applicant to exclude others from measuring the applied force in the particular manner disclosed above, does not preclude others from measuring the applied force an any of the many other ways it may be measured, as evidenced by for example Wada.
Furthermore, the examiner has considered the JPO’s allowance of the foreign priority application. The claims of that application are broader in scope than that of claim 1 and claim 4 of the present application. The examiner has given the JPO’s opinion the appropriate weight in deciding on the allowability of claim 4.
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.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yamamoto, Yasuhiro et al.. US 20230279634 A1. Work Machine and Control Device for Work Machine.
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 HENRY RICHARD HINTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1051. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at (571) 272-7298. 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.
/HENRY R HINTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665