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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the filing of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/765,436, filed July 8, 2024. Claims 1-16 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on July 8, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFT 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112
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: “a vehicle controller”, as recited in claim 1, and “a portable device controller”, as recited in claims 2 and 12.
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. In looking at the Specification, “a vehicle controller” comprises processor circuit and memory, as recited in paras 0073-0075 or the Written Description, and “a portable device controller” comprises a processor and suitable software, as recited in para 0150.
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 § 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 1-3, 5, 7-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0091002, to Miura et al. (hereinafter Miura), and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 9,938,693, to Reed et al. (hereinafter Reed).
As per claim 1, Miura discloses an attachment usage system (e.g. see Abstract, wherein a flow rate setting system for a working machine having an attachment is provided) comprising: a working vehicle including a hitch to attach and detach thereto and therefrom an attachment to perform work (e.g. see Fig. 15 and para 0047-0048, wherein a work machine 1 is provided including a bucket 20 (e.g. attachment) which can be replaced with auxiliary attachments, which would require a hitch to attach and detach the attachment and auxiliary attachments); and a portable device (e.g. see Fig. 1, and para 0069, wherein the system of the work machine includes a mobile terminal 50); …the portable device includes a short-distance communication interface and is operable to transmit, via the short-distance communication interface, a second wireless signal which includes a piece of second attachment information relating to the attachment to be attached to the hitch…(e.g. see Fig. 1, and paras 0080-0088, wherein the mobile terminal includes a communication part 51 configured for wireless communication through Wi-Fi, the communication part being configured to transmit an operational settings, such as setting flow rate of hydraulic fluid from the work machine to the attachment (i.e. second attachment information)); the working vehicle includes: a receiver to receive the first wireless signal and the second wireless signal (e.g. see Fig. 1, and paras 0068-0070, 0080-0088, wherein the work machine includes communication part 46 configured for receiving information from the mobile terminal including an attachment identification (i.e. first attachment information/signal) and the setting flow rate of hydraulic fluid for the attachment (i.e. second attachment information/signal)); and a vehicle controller (e.g. see Fig. 1, and para 0058, wherein the work machine includes a control part 41); and the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to perform a selecting process to select, according to a predetermined condition, a piece of attachment information which is the piece of first attachment information or the piece of second attachment information included in one of one or more of the first and/or second wireless signals received by the receiver, and perform a predetermined process based on the piece of attachment information selected in the selecting process (e.g. see Fig. 1, and paras 0057 and 0096 , wherein upon receipt of the attachment identification information (i.e. first attachment information/signal) and the setting level or flow rate of hydraulic fluid for the attachment (i.e. second attachment information/signal) (i.e. predetermined condition and selecting process), the control part controls hydraulic fluid level and flow rate to the attachment based upon input from an operation member 40 (i.e. predetermined process)).
Miura teaches manual input of the tool identification into the mobile terminal (e.g. see para 0076) as opposed to obtaining tool identification through scanning for transmitted signals from the tool. As such Miura fails to particularly disclose that the attachment is operable to have therein or thereon a transmitter to periodically transmit a first wireless signal which includes a piece of first attachment information relating to the attachment and which is compliant with a near field communication standard…and that the portable device is compliant with the near field communication standard. However, Reed teaches an asset tracking and work tool identification system comprising a scanning device 48 configured for communication with a work tool 32, 42, through a near-field communication network, for the purpose of receiving an identification of the work tool (i.e. a first wireless signal including a piece of first attachment information) transmitted by a tracking device 46 attached thereto (e.g. see Figs. 2 and 4, col. 4, lines 26-49, and col. 5, line 5, to col. 6, line 25). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the mobile device of Miura to allow for scanning of identification information, as opposed to manual input, for the purpose of reducing human error and reducing identification time.
As per claim 2, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 1, and Miura further discloses wherein the portable device includes: an input interface to receive input of information indicating the attachment to be attached to the hitch (e.g. see Figs. 1 and 4, and par 0079, wherein the mobile terminal 50 includes a first obtaining part 55 providing a first input part 60 for identifying the tool); and a portable device controller (e.g. see para 0070, wherein the mobile terminal comprises a smartphone or mobile computer (i.e. includes a controller)) configured or programmed to cause the short-distance communication interface to transmit the second wireless signal including the piece of second attachment information which corresponds to the information received via the input interface (e.g. the Office notes that controllers of smartphones and other mobile devices causes transmission and reception of data, such as through second communication part 51).
As per claim 3, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 2, and Miura further discloses wherein the portable device includes a portable device memory to store one or more of the pieces of second attachment information relating to one or more of the attachments usable with the working vehicle (e.g. see Fig. 1, and para 0093, wherein the mobile terminal includes storage part 54 for storing the identification and setting information); and the portable device controller is configured or programmed to read, from the portable device memory, one of the one or more pieces of second attachment information that corresponds to the information received via the input interface (e.g. see para 0095-0096, wherein the mobile terminal extracts identification and setting levels and transmits it to the working machine; optionally, the identification and setting levels are displayed, via display part 53).
As per claim 5, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 2, and Miura further discloses wherein the input interface includes a code reader to read an attachment code indicating the attachment to be attached to the hitch; and the portable device controller is configured or programmed to acquire the piece of second attachment information based on the attachment code read by the code reader (e.g. see para 0013, wherein the tool includes an identification code and the mobile terminal is configured to read the code).
As per claim 7, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 1, and Miura further discloses wherein the working vehicle includes: a traveling device to cause a vehicle body to travel; and a working device to change at least one of a position or a posture of the attachment attached to the hitch to cause the attachment to perform work (e.g. see Fig. 15), wherein the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to perform the selecting process when at least one of the traveling device or the working device is actuated with the attachment attached to the hitch (e.g. the Office notes that the hydraulic flow level and rate changes according to the selecting process when attached to the work machine and in use).
As per claim 8, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 1, and Miura further discloses wherein the working vehicle includes a mode switch to be operated to activate an attachment mode in which work is performed by the attachment attached to the hitch; and the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to perform the selecting process when the mode switch is operated (e.g. the Office notes that the hydraulic flow level and rate changes according to the selecting process when attached to the work machine).
As per claim 9, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 1, and Miura further discloses wherein the working vehicle includes a memory to store, for a period of time, one or more of the pieces of first attachment information included in one or more of the first wireless signals received by the receiver (e.g. the Office notes that the received identification information of the tool, received by the working machine, must be stored at least temporarily while the work machine is programmed with the tool information of the second wireless signal); and the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to: when the second wireless signal is received by the receiver, perform the selecting process to select the piece of second attachment information included in the received second wireless signal (e.g. see rejection of claim 1); and at a predetermined point in time different from when the second wireless signal is received, perform the selecting process to select, according to the predetermined condition, one of the one or more pieces of first attachment information stored in the memory (e.g. the office notes that the selection process must be performed after reception of the additional information, which would be performed at time based upon the system configuration).
As per claim 10, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 1, and Miura further discloses wherein the working vehicle includes a memory to store, for a period of time, one or more of the pieces of first attachment information included in one or more of the first wireless signals received by the receiver and one or more of the pieces of second attachment information included in one or more of the second wireless signals received by the receiver (e.g. the Office notes that the received identification information of the tool and the setting information, received by the working machine, must be stored at least temporarily while the work machine is programmed with the tool information); and the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to perform the selecting process to select, according to the predetermined condition, one of the one or more pieces of first and/or second attachment information stored in the memory (e.g. see rejection of claim 1).
As per claim 11, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 10, and Miura further discloses wherein the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to: when the first wireless signal is received by the receiver, if a received signal strength of the first wireless signal is equal to or higher than a first predetermined value, cause the memory to store the piece of first attachment information included in the first wireless signal; and when the second wireless signal is received by the receiver, if a received signal strength of the second wireless signal is equal to or higher than a second predetermined value, cause the memory to store the piece of second attachment information included in the second wireless signal (e.g. the Office notes that storage of the first and second wireless signal would only be stored if the signals are sufficient in strength (i.e. higher than a predetermined value) so as to receive all relevant data).
As per claim 13, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 10, and further teach wherein the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to: when the first wireless signal is received by the receiver, cause the memory to store a piece of transmitter information relating to the transmitter included in the first wireless signal such that the piece of transmitter information and the piece of first attachment information are associated with each other (e.g. see col. 4, line 50, to col. 5, line 4, wherein Reed further teaches that the tool transmits both the work tool identification signal and a unique identifier (e.g. MAC address), which would be stored, at least temporarily (also see col. 7, lines 9-39, wherein location information of the tracker is saved)); when the second wireless signal is received by the receiver, cause the memory to store a piece of portable device information relating to the portable device included in the second wireless signal such that the piece of portable device information and the piece of second attachment information are associated with each other; and in performing the selecting process, if the one or more pieces of first and/or second attachment information stored in the memory include the piece of second attachment information associated with the piece of portable device information, select the piece of second attachment information (e.g. see Reed, the Office notes that for the control center to receive and accept the second information, so as to distinguish this information from all other received information, the identification information of the portable device (e.g. scanning device) must be transmitted to the control center, along with all other data (i.e. tool identification and location information)). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the mobile device of Miura to confirm the identity of the portable device before acceptance and/or utilization of the associated data for the purpose of ensuring only proper data is utilized.
As per claim 14, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 13, but fail to teach wherein the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to: when the first wireless signal is received by the receiver, cause the memory to store a received signal strength of the first wireless signal such that the received signal strength is associated with the piece of transmitter information and the piece of first attachment information; and in performing the selecting process, if the one or more pieces of attachment information stored in the memory only include one or more of the pieces of first attachment information associated with one or more of the pieces of transmitter information, select one of the one or more pieces of first attachment information that is associated with a highest one of one or more of the received signal strengths stored in the memory. However, Zitterbart teaches receiving and analyzing a signal strength emitted from the different tools and based upon the signal strength, configured the work machine based upon the closest tool based upon the signal strength (e.g. see paras 0028-0034). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the mobile device of Miura to confirm the identity, based upon signal strength indicating location, of the tool before acceptance and/or utilization of the associated data for the purpose of ensuring only proper data is utilized.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0091002, to Miura et al. (hereinafter Miura), in view of U.S. Patent No. 9,938,693, to Reed et al. (hereinafter Reed), and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0024825, to Futakami.
As per claim 4, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 2, and further teaches further comprising: a server to store one or more of the pieces of second attachment information relating to one or more of the attachments usable with the working vehicle (e.g. see Miura, Fig. 2, and col. 6, line 49, to col. 7, line 8, wherein the tool asset information is stored at a remove asset location control center 58); wherein the input interface includes: a user interface (e.g. see Reed, Fig. 6, first input part 60); and a long-distance communication interface to communicate with the server (e.g. see Miura, Fig. 2, and col. 6, line 49, to col. 7, line 8, wherein the tool asset information is stored at a remove asset location control center 58 (i.e. long-distance communication interface to transmit the data to the control center)); wherein the input interface includes: a user interface (e.g. see Reed, Fig. 6, first input part 60), but fail to teach the portable device controller is configured or programmed to receive, via the long-distance communication interface from the server, one of the one or more pieces of second attachment information that corresponds to the information received via the user interface. However, Futakami teaches an excavator (portable device controller) receiving setting information (i.e. second attachment information) from a server 20 through a communication terminal 19 (i.e. long-distance communication interface) (e.g. see Fig. 3 and para 0121). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the mobile device of Miura to include receiving attachment operational information from a server for the purpose of providing updated and most recent tool operational information.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0091002, to Miura et al. (hereinafter Miura), in view of U.S. Patent No. 9,938,693, to Reed et al. (hereinafter Reed), and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0289221, to Velde et al. (hereinafter Velde).
As per claim 6, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the working vehicle includes an attaching switch to be operated to attach the attachment to the hitch; and the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to perform the selecting process when the attaching switch is operated continuously for a predetermined period or more. However, Velde teaches attachment sensor inputs (i.e. switch) that causes change in mode operation based upon type of attachment (e.g. see Fig. 3 and para 0042). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the mobile device of Miura to change perform selecting process to change operation of the machine upon determination that the attachment is attached to ensure proper operation.
As per claim 15, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 1, but fail to teach wherein the working vehicle includes a detaching switch to be operated to allow the attachment to be detached from the hitch; and the vehicle controller is configured or programmed to, when the detaching switch is operated continuously for a predetermined period of time or more, end the predetermined process and deselect the selected piece of attachment information. However, Velde teaches attachment sensor inputs (i.e. switch) that causes change in mode operation based upon type of attachment (e.g. see Fig. 3 and para 0042); the Office further note that after detachment (i.e. detaching switch) the work machine would no longer operate according to tool specifications. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the mobile device of Miura to change perform selecting process to change operation of the machine upon determination that the attachment is attached to ensure proper operation.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0091002, to Miura et al. (hereinafter Miura), in view of U.S. Patent No. 9,938,693, to Reed et al. (hereinafter Reed), and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0164550, to Davis et al. (hereinafter Davis).
As per claim 16, Miura, as modified by Reed, teaches the features of claim 13, but fail to teach wherein the transmitter includes a beacon transmitter; the receiver includes a beacon scanner; and the portable device is operable to transmit, via the short-distance communication interface, the second wireless signal with a same frequency as the first wireless signal transmitted by the beacon transmitter. However, Davis receiving tool identification information from a beacon transmitted from a tool (i.e. beacon transmitter and receiver) (e.g. see para 0058). With respect to using the same frequency for the two transmissions, Reed also teaches using the same communication means between the tool and scanning device, as well as the scanning device and control center (e.g. see col. 6, line 49, to col. 7, line 8). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the mobile device of Miura to utilize beacons and similar communication means/frequencies as simplified means for achieving communication between devices.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to claim 1, the features of transmitting the first wireless signal based upon vibration sensation, the first wireless signal including a first indication of vibration, and further transmitting the second wireless signal, the second wireless signal including a second indication of vibration, when view of other claimed features, renders the claim novel and non-obvious over the prior art of record. The Office notes that none of the prior art of record teaches or suggest transmitting wireless signals based upon vibration sensing, including transmitting indications of the vibration along with identification and other information, particularly in view of further claim details.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James M. McPherson whose telephone number is (313) 446-6543. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5PM Mon-Fri Eastern Alt Fri. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Flynn can be reached on 571 272-9855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES M MCPHERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663B