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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed 4/11/2026 have been fully considered.
In light of the amended claims, the double patenting rejection is withdrawn.
Regarding the amended limitation of “in the specific mode, a display size of an icon in the operation menu is enlarged when at least compared with the normal mode,” Examiner agrees that the cited art of record does not teach this limitation.
However, the previously rejected claim 4 merely taught enlarging the display size of the menu. The enlargement of “an icon in the operation menu” represents a new and previously unexamined limitation. This calls for an updated grounds of rejection, as explained below.
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, 5-6 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danguchi et al. (US 20230407602 A1) in view of Bamba (US 20080215978 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Danguchi teaches: A work machine control method, (See Danguchi Fig. 1 for work machine) comprising:
acquiring operation information on an operation of an operation section of a display device for a work machine; (See Danguchi Figs. 2-3 for monitor 60 including display unit 61 and input 62)
displaying an operation menu in a position corresponding to the operation section on the display screen displayed in a display section of the display device; (See Danguchi fig. 3 and [0054]-[0055] for menu information D2 in parallel to and controlled via input 62)
executing control based on the operation information; and (See Danguchi [0059]-[0060] for controlling operation of the vehicle based on the input)
switching a display mode of the operation menu from a normal mode to a specific mode on the display screen when a switching condition is satisfied. (See Danguchi Figs. 4-10 and [0086]-[0103] for manipulation of the screen and the menu bar via button press), wherein
the operation section includes a plurality of switches, (See Danguchi [0058] and throughout where input 62 consists of mechanical button switches)
the operation menu includes a plurality of items corresponding to the plurality of switches, and… (See Danguchi Figs. 4-10 and [0086]-[0103] for manipulation of the screen and the menu bar via button press)
Danguchi does not explicitly teach: in the specific mode, a display size of an icon in the operation menu is enlarged when at least compared with the normal mode.
However, Bamba teaches a multi-function peripheral (See Bamba [0005], [0010]-[0012]) which may be part of a vehicle operations panel (See [0032]-[0033], [0121]) wherein a menu icon is enlarged to indicate the selection of that icon (See Bamba Figs 3-4, [0049], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the application, to modify the display unit of Danguchi to include the enlarged icons of Bamba in order to more clearly display information.
Regarding claim 5, modified Danguchi teaches: The work machine control method according to claim 1, wherein
the switching condition includes a specific operation being performed on the operation section. (See Danguchi Figs. 4-10 and [0086]-[0103] for manipulation of the screen and the menu bar via button press)
Regarding claim 6, modified Danguchi teaches: The work machine control method according to claim 5, wherein
the operation section includes a specific operator for performing the specific operation, and
the operation menu includes a specific item displayed in a position corresponding to the specific operator on the display screen. (See Danguchi Figs. 3-10 and [0086]-[0103] for manipulation of the screen and the menu bar via button press, specifically button 62a4, corresponding with the “CAMERA” on the menu bar)
Regarding claim 9, modified Danguchi teaches: The work machine control method according to claim 1, further comprising:
switching the display mode of the operation menu from the specific mode to the normal mode on the display screen, when a cancel condition is satisfied. (See Danguchi Figs. 4-10 and [0086]-[0103] for manipulation of the screen and the menu bar via button press. See specifically the short-press which switches back and forth between modes)
Regarding claim 10, modified Danguchi teaches: A work machine control program that causes at least one processor to execute the work machine control method according to claim 1. (See Danguchi [0073] for storage unit with computer program)
Regarding claim 11, modified Danguchi teaches: A work machine control system, comprising:
an acquisition processor that acquires operation information on an operation of an operation section of a display device for a work machine; (See Danguchi Figs. 2-3 for monitor 60 including display unit 61 and input 62. See [0071]-[0072] for controller 90 including a CPU. Per paragraph [0059] of the present application, the acquisition, display, and control processors are realized by a single processor executing a control program, and are not necessarily separate physical processors)
a display processor that displays an operation menu in a position corresponding to the operation section on the display screen displayed in a display section of the display device; and (See Danguchi fig. 3 and [0054]-[0055] for menu information D2 in parallel to and controlled via input 62)
a control processor that executes control based on the operation information, wherein (See Danguchi [0059]-[0060] for controlling operation of the vehicle based on the input)
the display processor switches a display mode of the operation menu from a normal mode to a specific mode on the display screen when a switching condition is satisfied. (See Danguchi Figs. 4-10 and [0086]-[0103] for manipulation of the screen and the menu bar via button press)
Regarding claim 12, modified Danguchi teaches: A work machine comprising:
the work machine control system according to claim 11; and
a machine body on which the display device is mounted. (See Danguchi Figs 1-2 and throughout for work vehicle)
Claims 3 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danguchi et al. (US 20230407602 A1) in view of Bamba (US 20080215978 A1) and Nezu (US 20090172599 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Danguchi in view of Bamba teaches: The work machine control method according to claim 1, wherein
in a notification region having a length in a direction in which the plurality of items are arranged, running information relating to a running state of the work machine is displayed in the normal mode (See Danguchi Figs 3-6 and [0054] for crane information D3 displayed above menu D2)
Danguchi does not explicitly teach: whereas the operation menu is displayed in the specific mode.
However, expanding menu bars are well known in the art of user interface design. See, for example, Nezu Figs 1A-1C. The purpose may be to improve visibility on a small screen or to provide additional menu options that would otherwise clutter the screen.
In the case of Danguchi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the application, that menu D2 should expand to cover crane info D3 without expanding further, similarly to how the expanding menu of Nezu Fig 1B covers some of the navigation information, in order to leave the more vital camera images unobscured.
Regarding claim 7, Danguchi in view of Bamba teaches: The work machine control method according to claim 6,
Danguchi in view of Bamba does not explicitly teach: wherein
the specific item includes a first icon in the normal mode and includes a second icon different from the first icon in the specific mode.
However, it is commonly known in the art of user-interface design that a button or icon which changes its function after being activated should also have its icon change.
For example, Nezu teaches an interface including a menu with a button to expand the menu and retract the menu again. The button is shaped like an arrow and changes direction when pressed to indicate which direction the menu will move when pressed again. See Figs 1B-1C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the application, to modify the system of Danguchi in view of Bamba to include a changing icon to indicate the changing functionality of the button used to change the operating mode of the screen.
Regarding claim 8, modified Danguchi teaches: The work machine control method according to claim 7, wherein
the first icon points an inside of the display screen and the second icon points an outside of the display screen. (See Nezu figs 1B-1C for the arrows which first point into the screen and then out of it)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB KENT BESTEMAN-STREET whose telephone number is (571)272-2501. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00-5:00. 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, Peter Nolan can be reached on 571-270-7016. 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.
/JACOB KENT BESTEMAN-STREET/
Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights