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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The following is a final office action in response to the supplemental amendment filed on 12/19/2025.
Claims 1-6 and 7-9 are pending and have been examined.
Claim 7 has been canceled.
Claims 1-6 and 8-9 are amended.
Claims 1-6 and 8-9 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the Claim Rejections under 35 § USC 112(b): The amendment to claim 3 has
rendered the rejection moot. Accordingly, the rejection have been withdrawn. However, additional rejections have be applied to claims 1-6 and 8-9 due to the amendments which prevent the application from being in condition for allowance. They will be discussed in the subsequent, Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b), section.
Regarding the Claim Rejections under 35 § USC 101: The amendment to claim 1 which incorporates the subject matter of cancelled claim 7 have rendered the rejections moot. Accordingly, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Regarding the Claim Rejections under 35 § USC 103: Applicant’s arguments and corresponding
amendments, see pages 7-12 filed on 12/19/2025 have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendments and the Examiner’s current interpretation of the claim set. (Discussed in the Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Section) Accordingly, the rejections have been withdrawn.
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 1-6 and 8-9 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.
The reasons for applying the indefiniteness type rejections will be discussed in relationship to the claims.
Independent claim 1, which claims 2-6 and 8-9 depend from, reads, (Amended Claim 1, Lines 6-7) “the plurality of work machines including a first work machine currently in an operation state and a second machine currently in the standby state.” Afterwards, the switching command which switches the first and second work vehicles between the operation and standby states is implemented, and reads, (Amended Claim 1, Lines 8-12) “a command of switching an actual operation work machine from the first work machine to the second work machine, the actual management device is configured to set the first work machine in the standby state and set the second work machine to the operation state.” Examiner wishes to put heightened emphasis on the word “in” being using with regards to the first work machine after the switching operation, especially in comparison to the word “to” being used with regards to the second work machine, as “to” implies that the second work machine state is changed. “In,” on the other hand, implies an action is being done to a work machine already in a standby state, which appears to conflict with the “currently in an operation state” language present in Lines 6-7.
Therefore, the Examiner believes there is significant doubt raised towards the timeframe and switching status of the first work machine that surmount to the public being unable to clearly discern the claimed invention, rendering the Claim indefinite.
The Examiner is interpreting the Claim in regards to application of potential prior art as an invention wherein the actual machine management device switches a first vehicle in an operation state during a first period to a standby state during a second period, and additionally switches a second vehicle in a standby state in the first period to an operation state during the second period.
In addition, the claim subsequently reads, (Amended Claim 1, Lines 13) “the first work machine currently in the standby state,” and although the phrase does not render the claim indefinite on its own merits, the Examiner wishes to recommend theoretical amendments to the claim set which include explicit periods of time (If the Applicant deems there is sufficient support within the specification to do so) to clearly distinguish the status of the machines during each step, rather than using the term “currently”. “Currently” is used several times throughout the entirety of the claim set and could introduce further confusion in a potential amendment, to be clear, removing the phrase currently is not mandatory to overcome the rejections.
If the Applicant wishes to conduct an interview with the Examiner to resolve the preceding rejections and/or clarify the invention in response to the Examiner’s interpretation, they are encouraged to reach out to the Examiner’s contact information listed at the bottom of this Final Action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action on the condition that the Applicant agrees with the examiner’s interpretation of amended independent claim 1.
Claim 2-6 and 8-9 are 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 on the condition that the Applicant agrees with the examiner’s interpretation of amended independent claim 1.
RELEVANT, BUT NOT CITED PRIOR ART
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Kobel et al. (US 12,294,917 B2) teaches, (Page 52, Column 31, Lines 23-25) “The connectivity hub may transmit the machine-specific data corresponding to the identified machines to the user of the remote server,” and that, (Page 52, Column 31, Lines 31-35) “a user may have access to all of the plurality of machines, but only to specific information. For example, a customer may only have access to current data (e.g., e.g., current battery level, current location on a job site, current authorized operators, etc.).”
PNG
media_image1.png
511
749
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Morishita et al. (US 2024/0051405 A1) teaches, (Paragraph [0064]) “In the example shown in FIG. 7, time B corresponds to a time point when the supply of electric power from the commercial power source 100 to the construction machine 1 starts; at this point, the control device 8 starts controlling the construction machine 1 in the second mode. The SOC of the battery 72 is below the preset lower limit at the time point of determining the establishment of the second mode, thus starting charging of the battery 72. That is, the SOC of the battery 72 starts increasing. Further, in the example in FIG. 7, it is assumed that while the second mode is determined to be established, the output of the power supply device 71 is sufficient relative to the power necessary for driving the electric motor 5.”
Kagoshima (US 2011/0254513 A1) teaches, (Paragraph [0022]) “This will be more specifically described referring to FIG. 2 and FIG. 3. FIG. 2 shows a battery SOC/charging power map for a working period (charging map for working period), and FIG. 3 shows a battery SOC/charging power map for a standby period (charging map for standby period). FIG. 2 also shows the charging map for standby period by the bold broken line for easy comparison between the above two maps.”
Shibata et al. (JP 6267629 B2) teaches, Shibata teaches, (Paragraph [0012]) “a construction machine equipped with an electricity storage device for charging electric power and a communication terminal for transmitting the amount of electricity stored in the electricity storage device, the management device being configured to receive signals from the communication terminal and manage the amount of electricity stored in the electricity storage device, the management device comprising: a receiving means for receiving the amount of electricity stored in the electricity storage device transmitted from the communication terminal of the construction machine;”
Shibata additionally teaches, (Paragraph [0067], Lines 6-10) “the estimated amount of stored power can be calculated as a current value based on the elapsed time from the final amount of stored power (when the final amount of stored power was calculated or when operation was stopped) to the present. The estimated amount of stored power can also be calculated as a future value taking into account the time that will elapse in the future.”
Shibata additionally teaches, (Paragraph [0069]) “The determination means determines whether or not it is necessary to charge the power storage device 19, more specifically, whether or not it is necessary to operate the hydraulic excavator 1 (operation for charging the power storage device 19, maintenance charging). The determining means is set with a charge amount request threshold value that is a value for determining whether charging is necessary or not. This charge amount request threshold is set to, for example, 28% of the stored amount, and is compared with the estimated stored amount calculated by the stored amount estimation means. That is, the determining means determines whether the estimated amount of stored electricity in the electricity storage device 19 is 28% or less.”
Shibata additionally teaches, (Paragraph [0083], Lines 1-3) “the amount of electricity stored in the electricity storage device 19 of the hydraulic excavator 1 is managed by a management device 33 in a management center 32 located away from the hydraulic excavator 1 (remote location).” Shibata additionally teaches, (Paragraph [0017], Lines 1-4) “The management device can then output estimated power storage capacity or power storage capacity reduction information using the output means, thereby notifying users that the power storage capacity of the power storage device of a construction machine that is parked (not in operation) is decreasing, and when the power storage device needs to be charged.”
Takeo (US 2022/0412054 A1) teaches, (Paragraph [0232]) “when charging of the power storage device 19 based on the target charge amount set by the target charge amount setting function is completed, the notification part 3012 transmits a notification signal indicating that charging of the power storage device 19 is completed to the management device 300. Thus, the management device 300 can recognize that the charging up to the target charge amount of the power storage device 19 has been completed.”
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 ALEXANDER V. GENTILE whose telephone number is (703)756-1501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5.
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, Kito R. Robinson can be reached at (571)270-3921. 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.
/ALEXANDER V GENTILE/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664