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
Priority
The applicant’s priority to foreign application JP2022-006576 filed on January 19th, 2022 has been accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements filed on August 19th, 2024 and February 5th, 2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: biasing part in claim 7. “Biasing part” is interpreted as a tension coil spring (P0044, L1-2)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-7 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boyd et al. (US 10036138), hereafter Boyd.
With regards to claim 1 Boyd discloses a front loader (Abstract) comprising: a stand (21) provided on a boom and rockable to a support position where the front loader can be supported (Fig. 4), a link mechanism (bending/stretching link 22) that couples the boom and the stand and is movable in conjunction with rocking of the stand; and a lock member (holding member 24) that is rockably provided on the boom and holds the stand at the support position by locking the link mechanism at a predetermined position.
With regards to claim 2, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Boyd further discloses wherein the link mechanism includes: a first link member coupled to the boom (boom side arm 22a); and a second link member coupled to the stand (stand-side arm 22b), and the lock member locks the link mechanism in a state where the first link member and the second link member are overcentered (Fig. 3).
With regards to claim 6, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Boyd further discloses wherein the stand includes: a main body rockably supported by the boom (21a); and a grounding part (21c) that is rockable with respect to the main body and is in contact with a ground when supporting the front loader(Fig. 4) and a rocking shaft of the grounding part is movable to an engagement position capable of engaging with the boom and a release position capable of releasing the engagement with the boom by moving with respect to the main body (Fig. 3).
With regards to claim 7, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 6 as outlined above. Boyd further discloses wherein the stand further includes a biasing part (spring 32) that biases the grounding part such that the grounding part rocks in one direction in a rocking direction and the rocking shaft of the grounding part moves toward the engagement position.
With regards to claim 8, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Boyd further discloses wherein the boom and the stand are disposed such that outer edge portions of the boom and the stand are continuous in a straight line in a side view in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (Fig. 3; a continuous straight line can be in any direction, top to bottom or left to right).
With regards to claim 20, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 2 as outlined above. Boyd further discloses wherein the stand includes: a main body rockably supported by the boom (21a); and a grounding part (21c) that is rockable with respect to the main body and is in contact with a ground when supporting the front loader(Fig. 4) and a rocking shaft of the grounding part is movable to an engagement position capable of engaging with the boom and a release position capable of releasing the engagement with the boom by moving with respect to the main body (Fig. 3).
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd.
With regards to claim 3, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Boyd does not directly disclose wherein a rocking shaft of the lock member is disposed on a same axis as a rocking shaft of the stand.
However, this is considered a simple rearrangement of part and is therefore considered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to avoid any interference with other components (MPEP 2144.04.VI.C).
With regards to claim 9, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 2 as outlined above. Boyd does not directly disclose wherein a rocking shaft of the lock member is disposed on a same axis as a rocking shaft of the stand.
However, this is considered a simple rearrangement of part and is therefore considered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to avoid any interference with other components (MPEP 2144.04.VI.C).
Claim(s) 4-5 and 10-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Martinez et al. (US 9650754), hereafter Martinez.
With regards to claim 4, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein at least a part of the link mechanism and the lock member is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) where wherein at least a part of the link mechanism (strut 42) and the lock member (locking mechanism 52) is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position(empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to structure the stand and boom to store the lock mechanism in the manner disclosed by Martinez in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 10, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 2 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein at least a part of the link mechanism and the lock member is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) where wherein at least a part of the link mechanism (strut 42) and the lock member (locking mechanism 52) is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position(empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to structure the stand and boom to store the lock mechanism in the manner disclosed by Martinez in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 11, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 3 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein at least a part of the link mechanism and the lock member is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) where wherein at least a part of the link mechanism (strut 42) and the lock member (locking mechanism 52) is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position(empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to structure the stand and boom to store the lock mechanism in the manner disclosed by Martinez in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 12, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 9 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein at least a part of the link mechanism and the lock member is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) where wherein at least a part of the link mechanism (strut 42) and the lock member (locking mechanism 52) is stored in the stand and the boom in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position(empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to structure the stand and boom to store the lock mechanism in the manner disclosed by Martinez in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 5, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 13, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 2 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 14, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 3 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 15, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 4 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 16, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 9 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 17, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 10 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 18, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
With regards to claim 19, Boyd discloses all the elements of claim 12 as outlined above. Boyd does not disclose wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position.
However, Martinez discloses a front loader (Abstract) wherein the lock member is formed in a shape capable of storing at least a part of the link mechanism in a state where the stand is rocked to the storage position (empty space seen best in Fig. 4; not shown in Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate shape in order to facilitate automatic deployment of the stand.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LYNN BURKMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5824. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am to 6:00pm EST.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571)272-7805. 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.
/J.L.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights