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
Claims 1 – 15 have been examined.
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.
(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.
Claims 1, 4, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Noguchi et al. (8,631,890). In regard to claims 1 and 12, Noguchi discloses a foundation construction machine comprising a self-moving assembly for moving the machine on the ground (Fig. 1, item 1), an excavation tool (Fig. 1, item 4), at least one actuator for moving said excavation tool (Fig. 1, item 2), at least one electric motor for supplying power to at least one movement of the machine (Fig. 3, item 17), at least one interchangeable electric storage system configured to assume a working condition, in which the at least one interchangeable electric storage system is mechanically and electrically connected to the machine, and a replacement condition, in which the at least one interchangeable electric storage system is at least mechanically disconnected from the machine (Figs. 4 and 7, item 23), handling equipment for bringing said at least one interchangeable electric storage system from the working condition to the replacement condition, and vice versa (Fig. 5, items 5 and 24).
In regard to claim 4, Noguchi discloses wherein the interchangeable electric storage system comprises a plurality of storage units (Fig. 5, item 231), and a housing frame for housing the storage units (Fig. 5, item 26).
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 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi et al. (8,631,890) as applied to claims 1, 4, and 12 above, and further in view of Boe et al. (11,407,298). Noguchi does not disclose the specifics of the electrical connection between the machine and electric storage system. In regard to claims 8 and 14, Boe discloses a construction machine wherein the interchangeable electric storage system is connectable to an electric system of the machine by a male-female connector, wherein a part of the connector is integral with the interchangeable electric storage system and another part of the connector is integral with the machine, wherein the mechanical disconnection between the interchangeable electric storage system and the machine electrically disconnects the connector (Figs. 7 and 10, item 221).
The addition of these features would result in a predictable variation that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize as no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions, which has been held unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), absent evidence that the modifications necessary to effect the combination of elements is uniquely challenging or difficult for one of ordinary skill in the art. Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BAPI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claims 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi et al. (8,631,890) as applied to claims 1, 4, and 12 above, and further in view of Kurikuma et al. (8,700,246). Noguchi does not disclose the use of an external power charging device. In regard to claims 8 and 14, Kurikuma discloses a construction machine comprising an electric system provided with a socket, located on the self-moving assembly, configured to be connected, by a cable, to an external power network (Fig. 5, item 42).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the external charging, as taught by Kurikuma, to the construction machine of Noguchi, in order to provide additional charging/recharging options to the machine. This increases the usability and time in operation of the machine.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 – 3, 5 – 6, 9 – 11, and 15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Noguchi et al. (8,631,890) discloses a construction machine similar to the instant invention; however Noguchi, either alone or in combination, neither discloses nor suggests a construction machine comprising (in regard to claims 2 and 15) a fixed electric storage system that cannot be removed by means of the handling equipment, (in regard to claim 3) engaging or clutching means adapted to be mechanically coupled to docking or fastening points of the interchangeable electric storage system and at least one actuator for moving said engaging or clutching means, (in regard to claim 5) wherein the housing frame comprises height-adjustable supports, (in regard to claim 6) at least one electric cable for connecting the interchangeable electric storage system to an electric system of the machine, wherein a length of said electric cable is sufficient to allow maintaining an electric connection between the electric system and the interchangeable electric storage system while the machine is mechanically decoupled from the interchangeable storage system and is making some movements on the ground, (in regard to claim 9) wherein the handling equipment comprises an articulated parallelogram with which engaging means are associated, the engaging means being adapted to be coupled to docking means of the interchangeable electric storage system, (in regard to claim 10) wherein the handling equipment comprises engaging means integrally connected to one end of a linear actuator, wherein the engaging means are adapted to be coupled to the docking means of the interchangeable electric storage system, and (in regard to claim 11) an external assembling frame, provided with engaging or clutching means adapted to be mechanically coupled to the coupling points, and with height-adjustable supports. These limitations, in combination with each and every other independent claim limitation, are not shown in the currently cited prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Okada et al. (9,279,233) disclose a shovel;
Hirose et al. (12,168,858) disclose a battery operated work machine;
Persson et al. (2024/0413412) disclose a rock drilling rig.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN DANIEL WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)272-8269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (PT).
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.
/JOHN D WALTERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights