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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 29, 2024 and March 28, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference mentioned in the description: "52", and include the following reference not mentioned in the description: "53". 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. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anders et al. (US 2013/0006457 A1) (hereinafter "Anders"). Regarding Claim 1, Anders discloses a work vehicle (machine 10, Fig. 1, ¶[0014]) comprising:
an electric motor (any one of electric motor/generators 34 or 46 shown in Fig. 2 and described in ¶¶[0019]-[0020]);
a traveling body (cab 16, Fig. 1) configured to be driven by the electric motor (“operation of motor/generator 46 results in cab 16 rotating relative to chassis 12”, ¶[0020], Figs. 1-2);
a hydraulic oil tank configured to store a hydraulic oil (“hydraulic storage device”, ¶[0022]);
a hydraulic pump (any one of hydraulic pump/motors 48a and 48b shown in Fig. 2 and described in ¶[0021]) configured to be driven by regenerative electric power of the electric motor, which is generated by braking of the traveling body (“…motor/generator 46 may be capable of slowing and stopping rotation of cab 16 in a regenerative manner that results in electric energy being generated that may be routed … to electric storage device 42”, ¶[0020], Fig. 2), and to pump the hydraulic oil in the hydraulic oil tank (“…electric energy in electric storage device 42 may be routed … to motor/generator 34, which may then use the electric energy to supplement engine 32 and/or drive one or more of hydraulic pump/motors 48a and 48b”, ¶[0020], Fig. 2); and
an accumulator configured to accumulate a pressure of the hydraulic oil pumped from the hydraulic pump (“Accumulator 54 is configured to store hydraulic energy captured during operation of power system 30”, ¶[0023], Fig. 2).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anders (US 2013/0006457 A1) in view of Kojima (JP 2020172973 A). Regarding Claim 2, Anders discloses the work vehicle according to Claim 1, but does not identify a first flow path and a second flow path with a solenoid valve and a choke. Kojima discloses a vehicle (industrial vehicle 100 shown in Fig. 1 and described in ¶[0023]) with a braking force regeneration system (¶[0026], Fig. 2) further comprising:
a first flow path configured to connect the accumulator and the hydraulic pump to each other (“Flow Path 1” shown in annotated Figure 2 below, connecting the accumulator 40 to the pump 51);
a second flow path configured to connect an intermediate portion of the first flow path and the hydraulic oil tank to each other (“Flow Path 2” shown in annotated Figure 2 below, connecting an intermediate portion of Flow Path 1 and the tank 30);
a solenoid valve (“The relief valve 52 is a relief valve with an electromagnetic switching valve.”, ¶[0030], Fig. 2) provided in the second flow path (Relief valve 52 shown in Flow Path 2 in annotated Figure 2 below) and configured to be controlled in an open state while the electric motor outputs the regenerative electric power and the hydraulic pump is driven (According to the first embodiment of the braking force regeneration system described in ¶[0030] and illustrated in Figure 2, relief valve 52 is controlled in an open state, allowing hydraulic oil to flow at set pressure P2 when a signal transmitted from the brake sensor 112 indicates the brake pedal 111 has been stepped on); and
a choke (orifice 90, Fig. 4) provided downstream of the solenoid valve (As disclosed in ¶[0055], the second embodiment of the braking force regeneration system described in ¶¶[0042]-[0045] and illustrated in Figure 3, can include both the orifice 90 and the relief valve 52).
PNG
media_image1.png
500
738
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the work vehicle disclosed by Anders with the braking force regeneration system disclosed by Kojima. The motivation would have been to generate braking force by increasing the hydraulic pressure of the hydraulic oil flowing in the oil passage (¶[0037], Kojima). The combined vehicle would predictably achieve the desired result.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anders (US 2013/0006457 A1) and Kojima (JP 2020172973 A), as applied above, in further view of Yamagishi (JP H11269917 A). Regarding Claim 3, the combination teaches the work vehicle according to Claim 2, but does not recite a cooling device for cooling the hydraulic oil. Yamagishi recites a construction machine (¶[0003], Fig. 4) further comprising:
a cooling device (the cooling device described in ¶[0046] and shown in Figs. 1-2, comprising oil cooler 50, and first and second cooling fans 52 and 53) configured to be driven by the regenerative electric power of the electric motor (“The first and second cooling fans 52 and 53 may be attached to the output shaft of the electric motor 52d”, ¶[0039], Fig. 1) and to cool the hydraulic oil (“In the cooling device for the construction machine, the cooling device cools the high-temperature working oil returned to the traveling device, the working device, and the like”, ¶[0019]) downstream of the choke (“hydraulic oil is discharged from the hydraulic pump 26 and heat is generated due to the pressure loss in the hydraulic circuit during the circulation of returning to the oil cooler 50 side, which occurs when the hydraulic oil is released from the relief valve”, ¶[0007]). Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to add, with a reasonable expectation of success, the cooling device disclosed by Yamagishi to the combination while utilizing the regenerative electric power of the combination as the power source. The motivation would have been to maintain the temperature of the working oil below the maximum usable temperature and avoid deterioration of seals or the like and seizure of moving parts (¶¶[0007]-[0008], Yamagishi). The combined vehicle would predictably achieve the desired results.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anders (US 2013/0006457 A1) in view of Kawashima et al. (WO 2017099063 A1) hereinafter “Kawashima”. Regarding Claim 4, Anders discloses the work vehicle according to Claim 1 further comprising:
a battery (“Electric storage device 42 may include one or more batteries and/or ultra-capacitors configured to store electric energy”, ¶[0019], Fig. 2); and
electric motor (“Inverter 44 is electrically coupled to an electric motor/generator 46”, ¶[0020], Fig. 2)
Although Anders recites a control strategy for adjusting the level of power to be supplied or consumed by the electric and hydraulic storage devices (¶[0070], Fig. 5A), Anders does not specifically teach driving the hydraulic pump when a charging rate of the battery is a predetermined value or more. Kawashima discloses a working machine (§Description, p. 2, lines 67-68, Fig. 2) that operates the hydraulic pump 312 to supply hydraulic fluid to the pressure accumulator 315 when surplus power is supplied from the second drive system 320 (§Description, p. 4, lines 145-148). Kawashima recites the second drive system 320 comprising an electric power storage device as the energy supply unit (§Description, pp. 3-4, lines 120-127). Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the work vehicle disclosed by Anders with Kawashima’s operation of the hydraulic pump using surplus electric power. The motivation would have been to use or store surplus power across primary and secondary drive systems (Kawashima: §Description, p. 5, lines 169-172). The combined vehicle would predictably achieve the desired result.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anders (US 2013/0006457 A1) in view of Suzuki (JP 2002203583 A). Regarding Claim 5, Anders discloses the work vehicle according to Claim 1 further comprising:
a fuel cell (“Engine 32 may be supplemented by a hydrogen-powered engine, fuel-cell, solar cell, and/or any power source known to those skilled in the art.”, ¶[0018], Fig. 2), but Anders fails to recite the fuel cell supplying electric power to the electric motor. Anders is also silent regarding a cooling device for cooling the fuel cell. Suzuki discloses a fuel cell system (¶[0010], Fig. 1) configured to supply electric power to the electric motor (“the fuel cell stack 1 generates electric power to drive the drive motor 12”, ¶[0032], Fig. 1); and
a cooling device (a cooling water supply pump for supplying cooling water to the fuel cell and a radiator fan for cooling the cooling water described in ¶[0023]) configured to be driven by the regenerative electric power of the electric motor and to cool the fuel cell (as described in ¶[0013], surplus electric power including regenerative electric power is consumed by the external auxiliary device; where “…external auxiliary device is, for example, … the cooling water supply pump …, a radiator fan”, [¶0040]).
Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the work vehicle disclosed by Anders with the fuel cell system of Suzuki. The motivation would have been to provide “a control device for a fuel cell system that can always maintain a sufficient charge level and reliably consume surplus power” (Suzuki: ¶[0009]). The combined vehicle would predictably achieve the desired results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD OMID NEYZARI whose telephone number is (571)272-9530. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 AM-5 PM.
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303) 297-4337. 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.
/MOHAMMAD O NEYZARI/Examiner, Art Unit 3613
/JAMES A SHRIVER II/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights