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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in JAPAN on 09/04/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP 2023-143172 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation " the body frames ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependency from a claim that has been rejected.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE ‘120 DE 681 120 C.
Re claim 1, DE ‘120 teach a work vehicle, comprising: a body (fig. 6, dashed lines); a travel device (10) in the body; a boarding section (passenger compartment) provided in the body; a cooling object (4); a cooling fan (3); a pipe-shaped frame provided in the body along a right-left direction and having a vent hole (21) on at least either of a right portion and a left portion of the pipe-shaped frame (23, fig 6); and a communicating opening (22) provided in an intermediate portion of the pipe-shaped frame in the right-left direction and allowing the cooling fan and the cooling object to communicate with an inside of the pipe-shaped frame, and wherein the cooling fan is configured to cause air to be supplied to the cooling object or discharged from the cooling object through the vent hole, the pipe-shaped frame, and the communicating opening (fig 6).
Re claim 2, DE ‘120 teach the body is provided with right and left body frames provided along a front-rear direction, and a plurality of lateral frames provided along the right-left direction and connected to the right and left body frames, and the pipe-shaped frame is one of the lateral frames (noting a vehicle, para 1, have height, fig 1, and therefore the claim limitations are naturally disclosed for a vehicle with height and width, see the rejection of claim 1).
Noting that according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the plain meaning of ‘frame’ is
1. b
: something composed of parts fitted together and united
2
a
: the underlying constructional system or structure that gives shape or strength (as to a building)
b
: a frame dwelling.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10-11, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KOBAYASHI US 2015/0359174 Al.
Re claim 1, KOBAYASHI teach a work vehicle, comprising: a body (fig. 1, external body frame parts and surfaces); a travel device (142) in the body; a boarding section (portion above 56, 68) provided in the body; a cooling object (186); a cooling fan (208); a pipe-shaped frame (206, 210) provided in the body along a right-left direction and having a vent hole (206a, 210a) on at least either of a right portion and a left portion of the pipe-shaped frame ; and a communicating opening (noting pipe an aperture connected to 208, fig 8) provided in an intermediate portion of the pipe-shaped frame in the right-left direction and allowing the cooling fan and the cooling object to communicate with an inside of the pipe-shaped frame, and wherein the cooling fan is configured to cause air to be supplied to the cooling object or discharged from the cooling object through the vent hole, the pipe-shaped frame, and the communicating opening (fig 8, para 77).
Re claim 2, KOBAYASHI teach the body is provided with right and left body frames (12) provided along a front-rear direction, and a plurality of lateral frames (20a, 54 22) provided along the right-left direction and connected to the right and left body frames, and the pipe-shaped frame is one of the lateral frames (noting a vehicle, para 1, have height, fig 1, and therefore the claim limitations are naturally disclosed for a vehicle with height and width, see the rejection of claim 1, the pipe-shaped frame is considered to also be one of the lateral frames).
Noting that according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the plain meaning of ‘frame’ is
1. b
: something composed of parts fitted together and united
2
a
: the underlying constructional system or structure that gives shape or strength (as to a building)
b
: a frame dwelling.
Re claim 3, KOBAYASHI teach wherein: the body frames each comprise: a first frame portion placed below the boarding section (see the rejection of claim 2), a second frame portion (36, 26) extending upward from a rear portion of the first frame portion, and a third frame (46b) portion extending rearward from an upper portion of the second frame portion, the travel device is provided behind the second frame portion and below the third frame portion, as viewed laterally, and the pipe-shaped frame is connected to the upper portion of the second frame portion and a front portion of the third frame portion (noting in the instant combination all parts are connected as an integral final assembly).
Re claim 4, KOBAYASHI teach further comprising: a seat frame comprising a vertical portion (52, 54) along an up-down direction, and a longitudinal portion (annotated fig) extending rearward from an upper portion of the vertical portion; and a seat (56, 68) attached to the seat frame, and wherein: the first frame portion is attached to a lower portion of the vertical portion of the seat frame, and the pipe-shaped frame is attached to a rear portion of the longitudinal portion of the seat frame (noting in the instant combination all parts are connected as an integral final assembly).
PNG
media_image1.png
388
507
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 5, KOBAYASHI teach wherein: the pipe-shaped frame comprises a portion extending upward (figs), and the seat comprises a backrest attached to the portion of the pipe-shaped frame which portion extends upward (noting in the instant combination all parts are connected as an integral final assembly).
Re claim 6, KOBAYASHI teach wherein: the cooling fan is provided behind the pipe-shaped frame, the cooling object is provided adjacent to the communicating opening and behind the pipe-shaped frame, and the air enters the pipe-shaped frame via the vent hole, is supplied to the cooling object through the pipe-shaped frame and the communicating opening, and is discharged from the cooling object through the cooling fan (figs, noting behind is relative to either direction which is not defined in the claim and thus on either side).
Re claim 10, KOBAYASHI teach further comprising: a battery (160) provided below the seat and in front of the cooling object (figs); a motor (142) configured to drive the travel device by electric power from the battery; and a heat shielding member (noting various housing parts in between, fig 6, such as 182) provided between the cooling object and the battery, and wherein the heat shielding member has an opening communicating with the communicating opening (fig 6 internal volume or aperture for 210).
Re claim 11, KOBAYASHI teach wherein: the cooling fan is provided behind the pipe-shaped frame (relative to various other parts, figs), the cooling object is provided adjacent to the communicating opening and behind the pipe-shaped frame (relative to various other parts, figs), and the air is supplied from the cooling fan to the cooling object, enters the pipe-shaped frame from the cooling object through the communicating opening, and is discharged from the vent hole through the pipe-shaped frame.
Additionally noting that for clarity, the recitation “and the air is supplied from the cooling fan to the cooling object, enters the pipe-shaped frame from the cooling object through the communicating opening, and is discharged from the vent hole through the pipe-shaped frame” has been considered a recitation of intended use. It has been held that the recitation with respect to the matter in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. See MPEP 2114. In the instant case, the prior art meets all of the structural limitations, and is therefore capable of performing the claimed recitations set forth above. Furthermore, the examiner notes that the inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. Finally, the intended fluid used in the apparatus to perform the intended function does not affect the patentability of the apparatus, since the apparatus is capable of using said intended fluid. See MPEP 2144.07.
Re claim 14, KOBAYASHI teach a battery (160) provided below the seat and in front of the cooling object (figs); a motor (142) configured to drive the travel device by electric power from the battery; and a heat shielding member (noting various housing parts in between, fig 6, such as 182) provided between the cooling object and the battery, and wherein the heat shielding member has an opening communicating with the communicating opening (fig 6 internal volume or aperture for 210).
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.
Claim(s) 7-9, 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOBAYASHI in view of Miyamoto US 20130292097 A1.
Re claim 7, KOBAYASHI fail to explicitly teach fins.
Miyamoto teach : a heat dissipation fin attached to the cooling object, and wherein the heat dissipation fin is disposed at a position facing the communicating opening (paras 19-20) to add surface area to the inverter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include fins as taught by Miyamoto in the KOBAYASHI invention in order to advantageously allow for enhanced air cooling.
Re claim 8, Miyamoto teach the heat dissipation fin is attached to an upper portion of the cooling object, the cooling fan is provided above the heat dissipation fin (fig 3), and the work vehicle further comprises a guide plate (31) configured to guide the air rearward which air is discharged from the cooling fan to add surface area to the inverter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include fins as taught by Miyamoto in the KOBAYASHI, as modified, invention in order to advantageously allow for enhanced air cooling.
Re claim 9, KOBAYASHI teach further comprising: a deck (60, 62) provided behind the seat, and wherein the guide plate guides the air discharged from the cooling fan to below the deck (in the instant combination).
Additionally noting that for clarity, the recitation “guides the air discharged from the cooling fan to below the deck” has been considered a recitation of intended use. It has been held that the recitation with respect to the matter in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. See MPEP 2114. In the instant case, the prior art meets all of the structural limitations, and is therefore capable of performing the claimed recitations set forth above. Furthermore, the examiner notes that the inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. Finally, the intended fluid used in the apparatus to perform the intended function does not affect the patentability of the apparatus, since the apparatus is capable of using said intended fluid. See MPEP 2144.07.
Re claim 12, KOBAYASHI fail to explicitly teach fins.
Miyamoto teach : a heat dissipation fin attached to the cooling object, and wherein the heat dissipation fin is disposed at a position facing the communicating opening (paras 19-20) to add surface area to the inverter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include fins as taught by Miyamoto in the KOBAYASHI invention in order to advantageously allow for enhanced air cooling.
Re claim 13, Miyamoto teach wherein: the heat dissipation fin is attached to an upper portion of the cooling object, the cooling fan is provided above the heat dissipation fin (fig 3), and the work vehicle further comprises a cover (31) covering the cooling fan from above (relative to any opposite object, fig 3) to add surface area to the inverter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include fins and fans as taught by Miyamoto in the KOBAYASHI, as modified, invention in order to advantageously allow for enhanced air cooling.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 3091906 A, US 20150359174 A1, US 9614207 B2, US 20170334310 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GORDON A JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-1218. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5 M-F PST.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/GORDON A JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 3763