Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/730,811

MOBILE CRANE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 22, 2024
Examiner
ABULABAN, ABDALLAH
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Tadano Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
131 granted / 192 resolved
+16.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
245
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§103
62.4%
+22.4% vs TC avg
§102
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
§112
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 192 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Non-Final Rejection 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 (IDS) submitted on 07/22/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori (JP 2003238077 A, all citations provided from machine translation attached) in view of Wu (CN 206529218 U, all citations provided from machine translation attached). Regarding claim 1, Mori teaches a mobile crane (crane C) comprising: a boom (10); a traveling vehicle (travel body 1) body supporting the boom (10); a distance detection device (safety device, 102) including an ultrasonic sensor (101) provided on a front side of the traveling vehicle body (Fig.1), the distance detection device being configured to detect a distance between the ultrasonic sensor and a detection object (an ultrasonic sensor (obstacle detecting means) for detecting the distance from the boom body tip to an obstacle). (Abstract, Page.4, lines 17-26, Figs.1-3, 8) Mori also teaches a member (fig.8, 110, 115) provided between the boom (10) in a state allowing traveling and the ultrasonic sensor (101). (Figs.1-2, 8) Mori also teaches wherein the mobile crane (crane C) travels with the boom (10) laid forward. (Figs.1-2, 8) Mori does not explicitly teach a shielding member and the shielding member being configured to block ultrasound emitted by the ultrasonic sensor. Wu teaches a shielding member (11) and the shielding member (11) being configured to block ultrasound emitted by the ultrasonic sensor (sensor 7 emits ultrasonic wave and the ultrasonic wave propagates through the shield 11 and it is obvious that the shield would block a portion of the wave). (Page.3, lines 22-23, Fig.1) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Mori to incorporate a shielding member and the shielding member being configured to block ultrasound emitted by the ultrasonic sensor in order to thereby calculate out the distance, when the measured distance back to the controller. Regarding claim 2, Mori teaches wherein the member covers the ultrasonic sensor from a side of location of the boom. (Figs.8, 1-2) Mori does not explicitly teach the shielding member covers the ultrasonic sensor. Wu teaches the shielding member covers the sensor. (Page.3, lines 22-23, Fig.1) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Mori to incorporate the shielding member covers the sensor in order to thereby calculate out the distance, when the measured distance back to the controller. Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori in view of Wu and Chen (CN 202897851 U, all citations provided from machine translation attached). Regarding claim 8, Mori teaches wherein the ultrasonic sensor is provided on the traveling vehicle. (Figs.1-2, 8) Mori does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor is provided under a bumper of the traveling vehicle. Chen teaches wherein the sensor (4, 5) is provided under a bumper (11) of the traveling vehicle (10). (Fig.1) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Mori to incorporate wherein the sensor is provided under a bumper of the traveling vehicle as taught by Chen in order to detect positioning of the crane through dynamic and static displacement signals and calculate the exact position of the crane. Regarding claim 9, Mori does not explicitly teach wherein the shielding member includes part of a bumper of the traveling vehicle. Wu teaches a shielding member (11). (Page.3, lines 22-23, Fig.1) Chen teaches the member (2, 6) includes part of a bumper (11) of the traveling vehicle (10). (Fig.1) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Mori to incorporate the shielding member as taught by Wu in order to thereby calculate out the distance, when the measured distance back to the controller and further modify Mori to incorporate the member includes part of a bumper of the traveling vehicle as taught by Chen in order to detect positioning of the crane through dynamic and static displacement signals and calculate the exact position of the crane. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-7 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDALLAH ABULABAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-3:00pm 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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. /ABDALLAH ABULABAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 22, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601819
SONAR SYSTEM INCLUDING TRANSDUCER ELEMENTS WITH A GAP THEREBETWEEN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591033
NOISE CAMERA, SERVER FOR PROCESSING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FROM NOISE-CAMERAS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586558
PHONONIC CIRCUIT COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571895
ACTIVE MILLS CROSS ARRANGEMENT SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566263
ELECTRONIC APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+15.0%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 192 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month