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
Claims 1-20 are amended.
No new claim is added.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response of arguments
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 01/30/2026; Applicant's “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
With respect to the claim rejections 35 U.S.C. § 103, applicants “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant has amended the independent claim and these amendments have changed the scope of the original application and the Office has supplied new grounds for rejection attached below in the FINAL office action and therefore the prior arguments are considered moot. However, even though applicant has amended the scope of the claims and the Office has provided new mapping of cited prior art below, thus the Office will attempt to address all remarks that remain relevant.
Applicant remarks:
Moriki does not disclose or suggest that the discharge flow rate for the first hydraulic pump for the swing hydraulic motor based on a determined maximum torque of the work tool.
Moriki fails to disclose or suggest limiting the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool based on roll and pitch data indicating an orientation of the work machine.
Office Response:
Please see the new mapping of the claim rejections.
Please see the new mapping of the claim rejections.
Applicant further argues that the other independent claims which recite similar features are allowable and the dependent claims are also allowable since they depend on allowable subject and the Office respectfully disagrees. It is the Office's stance that all of the claimed subject matter has been properly rejected; therefore, the Office's respectfully disagrees with applicant’s arguments.
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 1-6, 8-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over US 20140371995 A1 to Udagawa et al. (herein after “Udagawa”) in view of US20210332555 A1 to Metzger et al. (herein after “Metzger”).
Regarding claim 1, Udagawa teaches A torque control apparatus (See Udagawa a control device (11) ) of a work machine (See Udagawa hydraulic excavator ) constructed to control a swing motion of a work tool of the work machine through a hydraulic system thereof, the control apparatus comprising ( See Udagawa swing control system 100A)
A memory and a processor operatively connected to the memory and configured to (See Udagawa para[0026] memory, central processing unit (CPU))
under a condition where an operator is providing input to control the swing motion of the work tool, determine a maximum torque of the work tool indicative of a loaded condition of the work tool with the work machine at the orientation (See Udagawa para [0067]The powering torque limit calculator 95 is a part that calculates maximum torque of the swing motor 16 in the powering operation on the basis of the operation amount of the operating device 4A input via the pressure sensors 17 a and 17 b.), and
limit a swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool based on the determined maximum torque of the work tool in the loaded condition(See Udagawa para [0045] The swing control system 100 includes a speed limit value calculation system 110 for calculating the speed limit value (speed upper limit) of the swing motor 16, a power limit value calculation system (power limit value calculation unit) for calculating the power limit value (power upper limit) of the swing motor 16, and a torque limit value calculation system 130 for counting the maximum torque of the swing motor 16.) and
in accordance with a limited maximum rate for a variable displacement pump of the hydraulic system for the swing motion of the work tool such that no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool at the orientation and under the loaded condition (See Udagawa para[0009] In that respect, the work machine disclosed by the above-cited document limits the torque or speed of the electric actuator in accordance with the load of the hydraulic actuators (or delivery pressure of the hydraulic pump),)
wherein the limited maximum rate for the variable displacement pump is set in accordance with the determined maximum torque that is indicative of the loaded condition of the work load(See Udagawa para[0045] a torque limit value calculation system 130 for counting the maximum torque of the swing motor 16, para[0033] he control valves 5E and 5F change their switchover positions accordingly to control the flow of the hydraulic fluid delivered from the hydraulic pump 6,para[0049] a function of factors including operator input 722 to hydrostatic pump 686, slope control 724, which is a function of the amount of slope on which machine 10 is operating and pose of the machine, brake control 726, brake slope control 727, and desired torque limiting 728, which may be a function of desired engine torque limits and/or characteristics of the particular machine.),
However, Udagawa does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach receive data from a pose sensor constructed to generate orientation data indicating an orientation of the work machine, the orientation data including roll and pitch data of the work machine, wherein the limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data indicating the orientation meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition, in accordance with a limited maximum rate for the variable flow rate pump of the hydraulic system for the swing motion of the work tool such that no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool at the orientation and under the loaded condition. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches receive data from a pose sensor constructed to generate orientation data indicating an orientation of the work machine, the orientation data including roll and pitch data of the work machine, (See Metzger para[0003] The position and orientation of the machine is referred to as the “pose” of the machine, para[0017] a machine 10 including a plurality of Inertial Measurement Units (IMU's) 24, 25, 26, and 27 applied at different positions on components or portions of the machine 10, such as on the machine body 14, the boom 17, the stick 18, and the bucket (or other tool) 19. In a machine state control system according to various exemplary embodiments of this disclosure, the IMU's mounted on different components and/or portions of the machine 10 may replace or supplement conventional sensors such as pitch and roll sensors 32 )
wherein the limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data (See Metzger pitch and roll sensors 32) indicating the orientation meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition. (See Metzger para[0021] various non-IMU sensors positioned on machine 10 to determine the roll, angle, slope, and other information indicative of the position and orientation of machine 10, and the relative position and orientation of the swing components relative to the undercarriage or car body of machine 10. The controller may also be configured to receive and process signals indicative of anticipated inertia of front linkages such as boom 17, stick 18, and tool 19, with and without a payload. These signals indicative of anticipated inertia may include, for example, sensor-generated signals indicative of boom head-end pressures, in concert with, based upon, and/or as a function of the roll angle, slope, and positional orientation of machine 10.)
in accordance with a limited maximum rate for the variable flow rate pump of the hydraulic system for the swing motion of the work tool such that no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool at the orientation and under the loaded condition (See Metzger para[0063] The system can thereby prevent excessive stresses on various components and structures of the machine, and also prevent over-torqueing of the components or slamming of the components into objects at high rates of speed by slowing down pump flow ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 2, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 1. Udagawa teaches wherein the processor configured to select between torque magnitudes corresponding to respective orientations of the work machine for controlling the swing motion of the work tool. (See Udagawa para[0112] The maximum torque values output from the selectors 97A and 97B are output to the maximum value selector 44. The maximum value selector 44 then selects the largest of the three maximum torque values and outputs the selected torque value to the minimum value selectors 82 and 83. This causes the maximum torque of the swing motor 16 to be limited in accordance with the largest limit amount.).
Regarding claim 3, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 1. Udagawa teaches wherein the processor reduces the torque magnitude responsive to the orientation of the work machine meeting the predetermined threshold orientation condition (See Udagawa para[0049] desired torque limiting 728, which may be a function of desired engine torque limits and/or characteristics of the particular machine, age of the machine, desired wear characteristics, and other consumer-determined inputs.).
Regarding claim 4, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 1. However, Udagawa does not teach wherein the predetermined threshold orientation condition is an angle from zenith of a swing body of the work machine along roll or pitch axes. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches wherein the predetermined threshold orientation condition is an angle from zenith of a swing body of the work machine along roll or pitch axes (See Metzger para[0021] signals from the IMU's and various non-IMU sensors positioned on machine 10 to determine the roll, angle, slope, and other information indicative of the position and orientation of machine 10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 5, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 1. Udagawa teaches wherein the processor limits the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool according to a reduced torque mode or a limited maximum torque mode above which no further torque is able-to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool.(See Udagawa torque limiter 67, para[0074] A method of detecting the actual torque of the swing motor 16 involves measuring the value of the current to the swing motor 16 by an ammeter or the like and calculating the real torque from the measured value.).
Regarding claim 6, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 1. Udagawa teaches wherein the processor limits the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool according to the reduced torque mode or the limited maximum torque mode in response to a determination that the orientation meets the predetermined threshold orientation condition. (See Udagawa para[0063] The system can thereby prevent excessive stresses on various components and structures of the machine, and also prevent over-torqueing of the components or slamming of the components into objects at high rates of speed by slowing down pump flow, varying swing motor displacement, or overriding valve commands received from operator inputs,para[0086] the torque limiter 67 acts to limit the torque ).
Regarding claim 8, Udagawa teaches An excavator constructed to perform earth moving job tasks with a work tool positioned by a hydraulic system installed on the excavator, the excavator comprising: (See Udagawa hydraulic excavator )
a variable flow rate pump constructed to impel a flow rate change in the hydraulic system: (see Udagawa para[0039]The hydraulic pump 6 is a variable displacement hydraulic pump ) and
circuit to configured to:under a condition where an operator is providing input to control a swing motion of the work tool, determine a maximum torque of the work tool indicative of a loaded condition of the work tool with the excavator at an orientation, (See Udagawa para [0067]The powering torque limit calculator 95 is a part that calculates maximum torque of the swing motor 16 in the powering operation on the basis of the operation amount of the operating device 4A input via the pressure sensors 17 a and 17 b.), and
limit a swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool based on the determined maximum torque of the work tool in the loaded condition(See Udagawa para [0045] The swing control system 100 includes a speed limit value calculation system 110 for calculating the speed limit value (speed upper limit) of the swing motor 16, a power limit value calculation system (power limit value calculation unit) for calculating the power limit value (power upper limit) of the swing motor 16, and a torque limit value calculation system 130 for counting the maximum torque of the swing motor 16.)
wherein the limited maximum rate for the variable flow rate pump is set in accordance with the determined maximum torque that is indicative of the loaded condition of the work tool. (See Udagawa para[0045] a torque limit value calculation system 130 for counting the maximum torque of the swing motor 16, para[0033] he control valves 5E and 5F change their switchover positions accordingly to control the flow of the hydraulic fluid delivered from the hydraulic pump 6,para[0049] a function of factors including operator input 722 to hydrostatic pump 686, slope control 724, which is a function of the amount of slope on which machine 10 is operating and pose of the machine, brake control 726, brake slope control 727, and desired torque limiting 728, which may be a function of desired engine torque limits and/or characteristics of the particular machine.)
However, Udagawa does not teach in accordance with a limited maximum rate for the variable flow rate pump of the hydraulic system for the swing motion of the work tool such that no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool at the orientation and under the loaded condition. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches in accordance with a limited maximum rate for the variable flow rate pump of the hydraulic system for the swing motion of the work tool such that no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool at the orientation and under the loaded condition (See Metzger para[0063] The system can thereby prevent excessive stresses on various components and structures of the machine, and also prevent over-torqueing of the components or slamming of the components into objects at high rates of speed by slowing down pump flow ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 9, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 8. Udagawa teaches circuitry is configured to select between torque magnitudes corresponding to respective different orientations of the excavator based on the orientation data from the pose sensor. (See Udagawa para[0112] The maximum torque values output from the selectors 97A and 97B are output to the maximum value selector 44. The maximum value selector 44 then selects the largest of the three maximum torque values and outputs the selected torque value to the minimum value selectors 82 and 83. This causes the maximum torque of the swing motor 16 to be limited in accordance with the largest limit amount.)
However, Udagawa does not teach further comprising: a pose sensor constructed to generate orientation data indicating the orientation of the excavator. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches further comprising:
a pose sensor constructed to generate orientation data indicating the orientation of the excavator (See Metzger para[0003] The position and orientation of the machine is referred to as the “pose” of the machine, para[0017] a machine 10 including a plurality of Inertial Measurement Units (IMU's) 24, 25, 26, and 27 applied at different positions on components or portions of the machine 10, such as on the machine body 14, the boom 17, the stick 18, and the bucket (or other tool) 19. In a machine state control system according to various exemplary embodiments of this disclosure, the IMU's mounted on different components and/or portions of the machine 10 may replace or supplement conventional sensors such as pitch and roll sensors 32 ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 10, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 8. However, Udagawa does not teach wherein the circuitry is further configured to limit the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool based on roll and pitch data indicating the orientation of the excavator meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to limit the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool based on roll and pitch data (See Metzger pitch and roll sensors 32) indicating the orientation of the excavator meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition See Metzger para[0021] various non-IMU sensors positioned on machine 10 to determine the roll, angle, slope, and other information indicative of the position and orientation of machine 10, and the relative position and orientation of the swing components relative to the undercarriage or car body of machine 10. The controller may also be configured to receive and process signals indicative of anticipated inertia of front linkages such as boom 17, stick 18, and tool 19, with and without a payload. These signals indicative of anticipated inertia may include, for example, sensor-generated signals indicative of boom head-end pressures, in concert with, based upon, and/or as a function of the roll angle, slope, and positional orientation of machine 10.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 11, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 8. However, Udagawa does not teach wherein the predetermined threshold orientation condition is an angle from zenith of a swing body of the excavator along roll or pitch axes. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches wherein the predetermined threshold orientation condition is an angle from zenith of a swing body of the excavator along roll or pitch axes (See Metzger para[0021] signals from the IMU's and various non-IMU sensors positioned on machine 10 to determine the roll, angle, slope, and other information indicative of the position and orientation of machine 10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 12, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 8. Udagawa teaches wherein the circuitry limits the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool according to a reduced torque mode or a limited maximum torque mode above which no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool. .(See Udagawa torque limiter 67, para[0074] A method of detecting the actual torque of the swing motor 16 involves measuring the value of the current to the swing motor 16 by an ammeter or the like and calculating the real torque from the measured value.).
Regarding claim 13, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 8. Udagawa teaches wherein the circuitry limits the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool according to the reduced torque mode or the limited maximum torque mode in response to a determination that the orientation of the excavator meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition. (See Udagawa para[0063] The system can thereby prevent excessive stresses on various components and structures of the machine, and also prevent over-torqueing of the components or slamming of the components into objects at high rates of speed by slowing down pump flow, varying swing motor displacement, or overriding valve commands received from operator inputs,para[0086] the torque limiter 67 acts to limit the torque ).
Regarding claim 15, Udagawa teaches A torque control method (See Udagawa a control device (11) of a work machine (See Udagawa hydraulic excavator ) constructed to control a swing motion of a work tool through a hydraulic system( See Udagawa swing control system 100A), the method comprising
under a condition where an operator is providing input to control the swing motion of the work tool, determining a maximum torque of the work tool indicative of a loaded condition of the work tool with the work machine at an orientation(See Udagawa para [0067]The powering torque limit calculator 95 is a part that calculates maximum torque of the swing motor 16 in the powering operation on the basis of the operation amount of the operating device 4A input via the pressure sensors 17 a and 17 b.); and
limiting a swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool based on the determined maximum torque of the work tool in the loaded condition(See Udagawa para [0045] The swing control system 100 includes a speed limit value calculation system 110 for calculating the speed limit value (speed upper limit) of the swing motor 16, a power limit value calculation system (power limit value calculation unit) for calculating the power limit value (power upper limit) of the swing motor 16, and a torque limit value calculation system 130 for counting the maximum torque of the swing motor 16.)
However, Udagawa does not teach in accordance with a limited maximum rate for a variable flow rate pump of the hydraulic system for the swing motion of the work tool such that no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool at the orientation and under the loaded condition. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches in accordance with a limited maximum rate for a variable flow rate pump of the hydraulic system for the swing motion of the work tool such that no further torque is able to be applied for the swing motion of the work tool at the orientation and under the loaded condition (See Metzger para[0063] The system can thereby prevent excessive stresses on various components and structures of the machine, and also prevent over-torqueing of the components or slamming of the components into objects at high rates of speed by slowing down pump flow ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]).
Regarding claim 16, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 15. Udagawa teaches further comprising selecting between torque magnitudes corresponding to respective orientations of the work machine for controlling the swing motion of the work tool. (See Udagawa para[0112] The maximum torque values output from the selectors 97A and 97B are output to the maximum value selector 44. The maximum value selector 44 then selects the largest of the three maximum torque values and outputs the selected torque value to the minimum value selectors 82 and 83. This causes the maximum torque of the swing motor 16 to be limited in accordance with the largest limit amount.).
Regarding claim 17, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 15. Udagawa teaches further comprising reducing the torque magnitude responsive to orientation data from a pose sensor indicating the orientation of the work machine meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition.(See Udagawa para[0049] desired torque limiting 728, which may be a function of desired engine torque limits and/or characteristics of the particular machine, age of the machine, desired wear characteristics, and other consumer-determined inputs.).
Regarding claim 18, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 15. However, Udagawa does not teach wherein the orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches wherein the orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine (See Metzger para[0003] The position and orientation of the machine is referred to as the “pose” of the machine, para[0017] a machine 10 including a plurality of Inertial Measurement Units (IMU's) 24, 25, 26, and 27 applied at different positions on components or portions of the machine 10, such as on the machine body 14, the boom 17, the stick 18, and the bucket (or other tool) 19. In a machine state control system according to various exemplary embodiments of this disclosure, the IMU's mounted on different components and/or portions of the machine 10 may replace or supplement conventional sensors such as pitch and roll sensors 32).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 19, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 15. However, Udagawa does not teach wherein said limiting the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on roll and pitch data (See Metzger pitch and roll sensors 32) indicating the orientation of the work machine meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition. Nevertheless, Metzger same field of endeavor teaches wherein said limiting the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on roll and pitch data (See Metzger pitch and roll sensors 32) indicating the orientation of the work machine meets a predetermined threshold orientation condition. (See Metzger para[0021] various non-IMU sensors positioned on machine 10 to determine the roll, angle, slope, and other information indicative of the position and orientation of machine 10, and the relative position and orientation of the swing components relative to the undercarriage or car body of machine 10. The controller may also be configured to receive and process signals indicative of anticipated inertia of front linkages such as boom 17, stick 18, and tool 19, with and without a payload. These signals indicative of anticipated inertia may include, for example, sensor-generated signals indicative of boom head-end pressures, in concert with, based upon, and/or as a function of the roll angle, slope, and positional orientation of machine 10.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Metzger’s orientation data includes roll and pitch data of the work machine, limiting of the swing speed of the swing motion of the work tool is further based on the roll and pitch data in order to allow to help to ensure precision and safety in completion of the taskand to control remotely and/or automatically complete a programmed task (see para[0002]) .
Regarding claim 20, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 15. Udagawa teaches wherein the limited maximum rate for the variable flow rate pump is set in accordance with the determined maximum torque that is indicative of the loaded condition of the work tool. (See Udagawa para[0045] a torque limit value calculation system 130 for counting the maximum torque of the swing motor 16, para[0033] he control valves 5E and 5F change their switchover positions accordingly to control the flow of the hydraulic fluid delivered from the hydraulic pump 6,para[0049] a function of factors including operator input 722 to hydrostatic pump 686, slope control 724, which is a function of the amount of slope on which machine 10 is operating and pose of the machine, brake control 726, brake slope control 727, and desired torque limiting 728, which may be a function of desired engine torque limits and/or characteristics of the particular machine.).
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over Udagawa in view of Metzger and WO 2016180689 A1 to Hata( herein after “Hata”).
Regarding claim 7, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 1. However, Udagawa does not teach wherein the flow rate change for the variable flow rate pump is controlled by a proportional integral control process implemented by or using the circuitry. Nevertheless, Hata same field of endeavor teaches wherein the flow rate change for the variable flow rate pump is controlled by a proportional integral control process implemented by or using the circuitry. (See Hata para[0025] he pumps Pi, P2. The NFC pressure is configured to control the discharge flow rates of the pumps Pi, P2 in such a manner that the NFC pressure is maximum when the spool of the control valve CV is at the neutral position, that the greater the level of displacement of the spool, the lower the NFC pressure becomes, that the higher the NFC pressure, the lower the pump flow rates are made by the capacity controllers φΐ, φ2 of the pumps PI, P2, and that the lower the NFC pressure, the higher the pump flow rates are (NFC system) .
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Hata’s hydraulic pump controlled by a proportional integral control process in order to allow to use hydraulic system at its efficient point in accordance with the work amounts (see para[0003]).
Regarding claim 14, Udagawa and Metzger remain applied as claim 8. However, Udagawa does not teach wherein the flow rate change for the variable flow rate pump is controlled by a proportional integral control process implemented by or using the circuitry. Nevertheless, Hata same field of endeavor teaches wherein the flow rate change for the variable flow rate pump is controlled by a proportional integral control process implemented by or using the circuitry. (See Hata para[0025] he pumps Pi, P2. The NFC pressure is configured to control the discharge flow rates of the pumps Pi, P2 in such a manner that the NFC pressure is maximum when the spool of the control valve CV is at the neutral position, that the greater the level of displacement of the spool, the lower the NFC pressure becomes, that the higher the NFC pressure, the lower the pump flow rates are made by the capacity controllers φΐ, φ2 of the pumps PI, P2, and that the lower the NFC pressure, the higher the pump flow rates are (NFC system) .
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Udagawa’s work machine with Hata’s hydraulic pump controlled by a proportional integral control process in order to allow to use hydraulic system at its efficient point in accordance with the work amounts (see para[0003]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NAZIA AFRIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-6.
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, Scott A Browne can be reached at 5712700151. 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.
/NAZIA AFRIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights