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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 3/7/2025 & 3/25/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of the preliminary amendment(s) filed 3/25/2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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 4 & 5 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 6 is rejected based on its dependency of rejected claim 5
Regarding claim 4 the recitation “a notification unit capable of performing a notification” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “capable of”, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether the claimed notification performs a notification or not?
Suggested recitations:
“…further comprising a notification unit, wherein…”
“…further comprising a notification unit, that performs a notification…”
Regarding claim 5 the recitation “…lower traveling body capable of performing a traveling motion” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “capable of”, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether the claimed notification lower traveling body performs a traveling motion or not?
Suggested recitation:
“…a lower traveling body that performs a traveling motion…”
Regarding claim 5 the recitation “…an upper turning body mounted on the lower traveling body capably of performing a turning motion of turning…” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “capably of”, “capably” appears to be a typo. Moreover, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether the claimed notification upper turning body performs a turning motion or not?
Suggested recitation:
“…an upper turning body mounted on the lower traveling body that performs a turning motion…”
Regarding claim 5 the recitation “…an attachment attached to the upper turning body capably of performing a work motion;…” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “capably of”, “capably” appears to be a typo. Moreover, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether the claimed attachment performs a work motion or not?
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3 & 7-10 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Van Keulen et al. (US 12116963 B2) discloses a monitoring system and method for detecting clogging through fouling of an air filter of an internal combustion engine comprising a
differential pressure sensor means for determining a differential pressure between an ambient environment and a position directly downstream of the air inlet filter. The system further comprising at least one exhaust flow sensor means for determining the exhaust flow, and a controller which is communicatively connected to each of the sensor means for processing information therefrom. The controller is arranged for determining a first filter resistance coefficient based on, at least, a measurement of the differential pressure, and the exhaust flow. The system is arranged for, using the controller, to calculate a second filter coefficient based on the historic evolution of the first filter coefficient, the controller further arranged for comparing the second filter coefficient to a boundary value, and generating a clogging alarm signal when the second filter coefficient exceeds said boundary value. (Abstract)
Yoshino (JP 2009085769 A) discloses a device for measuring fluid in a pipe that measures a predetermined physical quantity of fluid in the pipe based on the output of the detection unit, a measurement signal is input from the pressure measuring device that measures the pressure of the fluid in the pipe without using the pressure guiding pipe And a comparison means for comparing the time-series change pattern of the pressure value represented by the input measurement signal with the time-series change pattern of the measurement value obtained by the output of the detection section, and the comparison means And an evaluation means for evaluating the degree of clogging of the pressure guiding tube based on the comparison result. (Solution)
The cited pertinent art does not anticipate nor render obvious a controller configured to perform: storing a judgment permission condition that includes a flow rate condition that a flow rate of hydraulic fluid passing through a filter exceeds a predetermined flow rate threshold; calculating a judgment permission time, which is an integrated value of time in which the judgment permission condition is satisfied; calculating a judgment target time, which is an integrated value of time in which the judgment permission condition is satisfied and a differential pressure detected by a different pressure detection unit exceeds a predetermined differential pressure threshold; and calculating a clogging degree, which indicates a degree of clogging of the filter, based on a comparison between the judgment permission time and the judgment target time.
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.
JP 6110353 B2 Wire electrical discharge machine with function to predict filter replacement time
JP 6002064 B2 Hydraulic control system for a hydraulic excavator
US 20160096231 A1 Wire electric discharge machine for performing electric discharge machining, while jetting machining fluid and provided with filtration device, has display unit for displaying calculated remaining days and hours
JP 2014173326 A Hydraulic control apparatus of hydraulic shovel for mounting of e.g. hydraulic breaker from hydraulic pump, has control unit that controls fluid control valve, when clogging state of filter is detected by clogging state detection unit
JP 2008267395 A DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING FILTER CLOGGING FOR CONSTRUCTION MACHINE
US 10695699 B2 Filter state estimation system and filter state estimation method
US 11772032 B2 Filter unit quality management system and filter unit quality management method
US 5239861 A Device for indicating contamination degree of hydraulic circuit and method of judging the contamination degree
WO 2012023229 A1 FILTER CLOGGING DETECTIION DEVICE OF CONSTRUCTION MACHINERY
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE J ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2174. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9am-5PM.
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, Kristina M Deherrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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.
/ANDRE J ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855