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 Preliminary Amendment filed on 08/01/2024 for application number 18/835,063 filed on 08/01/2024, in which claims 1-15 were originally presented for examination.
Claims 1-5 and 12-15 are amended.
Claims 1-15 are currently pending in this application.
Claim Interpretation
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the recitation “A computer program comprising instructions for causing a collision detection apparatus to perform at least the following,” given its broadest reasonable interpretation, encompasses transitory media, such as signals, carrier waiver, or the like. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 84 USPQ2d 1495 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-10 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Muramatsu et al. (JP 2006209333 A, hereinafter “Muramatsu”). The rejections below are based on the machine translation of Muramatsu, a copy of which is attached to this Office Action as also indicated in the 892 form.
Regarding claim 1, Muramatsu discloses a collision detection apparatus comprising at least one processor and at least one memory including computer program instructions, the at least one memory and the computer program instructions configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to:
detect a first collision detection device and a second collision detection device in a vicinity of the collision detection apparatus (Muramatsu at para. [0069]: “FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of the predicted speed, the actual vehicle speed, the predicted position, and the actual position for the vehicles A, B, C, and D. The predicted speed and the predicted position are obtained by the behavior prediction unit 4, and the actual vehicle speed and position are detected by the vehicle behavior information detection unit 1 or the road information detection unit 2”);
communicate with the first collision detection device by transmitting and/or receiving first collision detection messages (Muramatsu at para. [0015]: “The behavior detecting means detects behavior information of each moving body included in the moving body information. This behavior information may be acquired by communicating with another mobile body, or may be behavior information of a predetermined mobile body. The behavior prediction means predicts each behavior using the behavior information of each mobile object”);
communicate with the second collision detection device by transmitting and/or receiving second collision detection messages (Muramatsu at para. [0015]: “The behavior detecting means detects behavior information of each moving body included in the moving body information. This behavior information may be acquired by communicating with another mobile body, or may be behavior information of a predetermined mobile body. The behavior prediction means predicts each behavior using the behavior information of each mobile object”);
determine, based on the first collision detection messages, a first collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”);
determine, based on the second collision detection messages, a second collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”);
determine a priority order for the first collision detection device and the second collision detection device based on the first collision indicator and the second collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0094]: “the transmission frequency table indicates that the transmission frequency is lowered (NB, NS) when the degree of risk is equal to or less than the standard value (NB, NS, ZO) and there is a lot of communication traffic (PS, PB). . Thereby, the packet transmission amount of the own vehicle can be suppressed, and priority can be given to transmission of surrounding vehicles with high risk”);
determine, based on the priority order, a first communication frequency for communicating with the first collision detection device and a second communication frequency for communicating with the second collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0024]: “the communication means decreases the transmission frequency of the moving body information of the predetermined moving body as the risk level of the predetermined moving body with respect to the risk level of the other moving body decreases, and increases as the predetermined moving body increases”); and
communicate with the first collision detection device at the first communication frequency and with the second collision detection device at the second communication frequency, the first communication frequency being different from the second communication frequency (Muramatsu at para. [0088]: “The communication control unit 18 performs communication control based on the traffic estimated by the traffic estimation unit 14 and the risk level determined by the risk level determination unit 17”; para. [0090]: “the risk level is divided as follows. NB (Negative Big): Low risk NS (Negative Small): Low risk ZO (Zero): Standard risk PS (Positive Small): High risk PB (Positive Big): High risk Very expensive”; para. [0092]: “The transmission frequency is divided as follows. NB: Decrease communication frequency very much NS: Decrease communication frequency a little PS: Increase communication frequency a little PB: Increase communication frequency a lot”).
Regarding claim 2, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein the first collision indicator indicates a likelihood of a collision between a vehicle including the collision detection apparatus and a mobile object including the first collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”; para. [0103]: “That is, the mobile communication device can preferentially communicate with other vehicles when the degree of danger is high, while suppressing communication traffic around the own vehicle, so there is a risk of collision with other vehicles”).
Regarding claim 3, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein the second collision indicator indicates a likelihood of a collision between a vehicle including the collision detection apparatus and a mobile object including the second collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”; para. [0103]: “That is, the mobile communication device can preferentially communicate with other vehicles when the degree of danger is high, while suppressing communication traffic around the own vehicle, so there is a risk of collision with other vehicles”).
Regarding claim 4, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein determining the first collision indicator comprises at least one of the following: determining a speed at which the first collision detection device approaches the collision detection apparatus, determining a distance between the first collision detection device and the collision detection apparatus, or determining a type of a mobile object including the first collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0010]: “The behavior information means detects, for example, a motion state such as the speed of the moving body and a behavior result of the moving body such as the position of the moving body as the behavior information of the moving body. The behavior prediction means predicts the behavior of the mobile object at a predetermined time using the behavior information of the mobile object”).
Regarding claim 5, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein determining the second collision indicator comprises at least one of the following: determining a speed at which the second collision detection device approaches the collision detection apparatus, determining a distance between the second collision detection device and the collision detection apparatus, or determining a type of a mobile object including the second collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0010]: “The behavior information means detects, for example, a motion state such as the speed of the moving body and a behavior result of the moving body such as the position of the moving body as the behavior information of the moving body. The behavior prediction means predicts the behavior of the mobile object at a predetermined time using the behavior information of the mobile object”).
Regarding claim 6, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program instructions are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to change at least one of the following: a previous communication frequency of the collision detection apparatus for communicating with the first collision detection device or a previous communication frequency of the collision detection apparatus for communicating with the second collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0024]: “the communication means decreases the transmission frequency of the moving body information of the predetermined moving body as the risk level of the predetermined moving body with respect to the risk level of the other moving body decreases, and increases as the predetermined moving body increases”).
Regarding claim 7, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 6.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein changing a previous communication frequency comprises increasing or decreasing the communication frequency (Muramatsu at para. [0024]: “the communication means decreases the transmission frequency of the moving body information of the predetermined moving body as the risk level of the predetermined moving body with respect to the risk level of the other moving body decreases, and increases as the predetermined moving body increases”).
Regarding claim 8, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program instructions are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to store information on the priority order (Muramatsu at para. [0037]: “The information storage unit 3 is configured by a memory or the like, and sequentially stores information supplied from the vehicle behavior information detection unit 1 and the road information detection unit 2”).
Regarding claim 9, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program instructions are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to receive information from a plurality of collision detection sensors (Muramatsu at para. [0034]: “a navigation system is used as the vehicle behavior information detection unit 1 as a GPS sensor, a vehicle speed sensor, and a road information detection unit 2 for detecting a vehicle position”).
Regarding claim 10, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program instructions are configured to group collision detection sensors part of a collision detection device associated to a mobile object that shall be ranged at the same time (Muramatsu at para. [0036]: “The vehicle behavior information detection unit 1 detects the vehicle speed of the host vehicle as vehicle behavior information, and supplies the detected vehicle speed to the information storage unit 3 and the comparison calculation unit 5. The road information detection unit 2 detects the standard speed (for example, 45 km / h) of the road on which the host vehicle is currently traveling, and supplies this standard speed to the information storage unit 3. Note that the detection timing of the vehicle behavior information detection unit 1 and the road information detection unit 2 is 100 msec.”).
Regarding claim 14, Muramatsu discloses a method in a collision detection apparatus, the method comprising:
detecting a first collision detection device and a second collision detection device in a vicinity of the collision detection apparatus (Muramatsu at para. [0069]: “FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of the predicted speed, the actual vehicle speed, the predicted position, and the actual position for the vehicles A, B, C, and D. The predicted speed and the predicted position are obtained by the behavior prediction unit 4, and the actual vehicle speed and position are detected by the vehicle behavior information detection unit 1 or the road information detection unit 2”);
communicating with the first collision detection device by transmitting and/or receiving first collision detection messages (Muramatsu at para. [0015]: “The behavior detecting means detects behavior information of each moving body included in the moving body information. This behavior information may be acquired by communicating with another mobile body, or may be behavior information of a predetermined mobile body. The behavior prediction means predicts each behavior using the behavior information of each mobile object”);
communicating with the second collision detection device by transmitting and/or receiving second collision detection messages (Muramatsu at para. [0015]: “The behavior detecting means detects behavior information of each moving body included in the moving body information. This behavior information may be acquired by communicating with another mobile body, or may be behavior information of a predetermined mobile body. The behavior prediction means predicts each behavior using the behavior information of each mobile object”);
determining, based on the first collision detection messages, a first collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”);
determining, based on the second collision detection messages, a second collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”);
determining a priority order for the first collision detection device and the second collision detection device based on the first collision indicator and the second collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0094]: “the transmission frequency table indicates that the transmission frequency is lowered (NB, NS) when the degree of risk is equal to or less than the standard value (NB, NS, ZO) and there is a lot of communication traffic (PS, PB). . Thereby, the packet transmission amount of the own vehicle can be suppressed, and priority can be given to transmission of surrounding vehicles with high risk”);
determining, based on the priority order, a first communication frequency for communicating with the first collision detection device and a second communication frequency for communicating with the second collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0024]: “the communication means decreases the transmission frequency of the moving body information of the predetermined moving body as the risk level of the predetermined moving body with respect to the risk level of the other moving body decreases, and increases as the predetermined moving body increases”); and
communicating with the first collision detection device at the first communication frequency and with the second collision detection device at the second communication frequency, the first communication frequency being different from the second communication frequency (Muramatsu at para. [0088]: “The communication control unit 18 performs communication control based on the traffic estimated by the traffic estimation unit 14 and the risk level determined by the risk level determination unit 17”; para. [0090]: “the risk level is divided as follows. NB (Negative Big): Low risk NS (Negative Small): Low risk ZO (Zero): Standard risk PS (Positive Small): High risk PB (Positive Big): High risk Very expensive”; para. [0092]: “The transmission frequency is divided as follows. NB: Decrease communication frequency very much NS: Decrease communication frequency a little PS: Increase communication frequency a little PB: Increase communication frequency a lot”).
Regarding claim 15, Muramatsu discloses a computer program comprising instructions for causing a collision detection apparatus to perform at least the following:
detecting a first collision detection device and a second collision detection device in a vicinity of the collision detection apparatus (Muramatsu at para. [0069]: “FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of the predicted speed, the actual vehicle speed, the predicted position, and the actual position for the vehicles A, B, C, and D. The predicted speed and the predicted position are obtained by the behavior prediction unit 4, and the actual vehicle speed and position are detected by the vehicle behavior information detection unit 1 or the road information detection unit 2”);
communicating with the first collision detection device by transmitting and/or receiving first collision detection messages (Muramatsu at para. [0015]: “The behavior detecting means detects behavior information of each moving body included in the moving body information. This behavior information may be acquired by communicating with another mobile body, or may be behavior information of a predetermined mobile body. The behavior prediction means predicts each behavior using the behavior information of each mobile object”);
communicating with the second collision detection device by transmitting and/or receiving second collision detection messages (Muramatsu at para. [0015]: “The behavior detecting means detects behavior information of each moving body included in the moving body information. This behavior information may be acquired by communicating with another mobile body, or may be behavior information of a predetermined mobile body. The behavior prediction means predicts each behavior using the behavior information of each mobile object”);
determining, based on the first collision detection messages, a first collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”);
determining, based on the second collision detection messages, a second collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0016]: “The degree-of-risk determination means is based on the behavior information of each mobile body detected at the predetermined time by the behavior detection means and the predicted behavior information of each mobile body representing the behavior predicted by the behavior prediction means. Quantitatively determine the risk level. The risk level of each moving object represents the degree to which the behavior information at a predetermined time deviates from the predicted behavior information”);
determining a priority order for the first collision detection device and the second collision detection device based on the first collision indicator and the second collision indicator (Muramatsu at para. [0094]: “the transmission frequency table indicates that the transmission frequency is lowered (NB, NS) when the degree of risk is equal to or less than the standard value (NB, NS, ZO) and there is a lot of communication traffic (PS, PB). . Thereby, the packet transmission amount of the own vehicle can be suppressed, and priority can be given to transmission of surrounding vehicles with high risk”);
determining, based on the priority order, a first communication frequency for communicating with the first collision detection device and a second communication frequency for communicating with the second collision detection device (Muramatsu at para. [0024]: “the communication means decreases the transmission frequency of the moving body information of the predetermined moving body as the risk level of the predetermined moving body with respect to the risk level of the other moving body decreases, and increases as the predetermined moving body increases”); and
communicating with the first collision detection device at the first communication frequency and with the second collision detection device at the second communication frequency, the first communication frequency being different from the second communication frequency (Muramatsu at para. [0088]: “The communication control unit 18 performs communication control based on the traffic estimated by the traffic estimation unit 14 and the risk level determined by the risk level determination unit 17”; para. [0090]: “the risk level is divided as follows. NB (Negative Big): Low risk NS (Negative Small): Low risk ZO (Zero): Standard risk PS (Positive Small): High risk PB (Positive Big): High risk Very expensive”; para. [0092]: “The transmission frequency is divided as follows. NB: Decrease communication frequency very much NS: Decrease communication frequency a little PS: Increase communication frequency a little PB: Increase communication frequency a lot”).
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.
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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu in view of Kasagi (JP 2001004730 A). The rejections below are based on the machine translation of Kasagi, a copy of which is attached to this Office Action as also indicated in the 892 form.
Regarding claim 11, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Muramatsu further discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program instructions are configured to, with the at least one processor, (Muramatsu at para. [0024]: “the communication means decreases the transmission frequency of the moving body information of the predetermined moving body as the risk level of the predetermined moving body with respect to the risk level of the other moving body decreases”).
However, Muramatsu does not explicitly state cause the apparatus to monitor the communication with first and second collision detection devices for error rate.
In the same field of endeavor, Kasagi teaches cause the apparatus to monitor the communication with first and second collision detection devices for error rate (Kasagi at para. [0005]: “in this road-vehicle communication system, it is necessary to ensure that the roadside device and the vehicle-mounted device installed in various environments can reliably communicate within a predetermined communication range. As one of the methods, it is effective to measure a bit error rate (BER: Bit Error Rate) that indicates how much error occurs in data transmission and reception”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Muramatsu by adding the apparatus to monitor the communication of Kasagi with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the apparatus of Muramatsu in view of Kasagi is to provide reliable data communication.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu in view of Ishii et al. (US 2022/0308589 A1, hereinafter “Ishii”).
Regarding claim 12, Muramatsu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
However, Muramatsu does not explicitly state wherein the apparatus is included in a mobile mining vehicle.
In the same field of endeavor, Ishii teaches wherein the apparatus is included in a mobile mining vehicle (Ishii at para. [0028]: “The umnanned dump trucks 10-1 to 10-4 are transport vehicles that aim to convey loads, such as earth and sand and ores, can perform umnanned autonomous traveling, and convey earth and sand and mined materials”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Muramatsu by adding the mobile mining vehicle of Ishii with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the apparatus of Muramatsu in view of Ishii is to provide improved safety for mining operations.
Regarding claim 13, Muramatsu in view of Ishii teaches the apparatus according to claim 12.
Ishii further teaches wherein the mobile mining vehicle is selected from a rock drilling rig, a loader, a dumper, a load haul dump (LHD) vehicle, a ground support rig, an underground transport vehicle, and a light duty vehicle (Ishii at para. [0028]: “The umnanned dump trucks 10-1 to 10-4 are transport vehicles that aim to convey loads, such as earth and sand and ores, can perform umnanned autonomous traveling, and convey earth and sand and mined materials”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Muramatsu by adding the mobile mining vehicle of Ishii with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the apparatus of Muramatsu in view of Ishii is to provide improved safety for mining operations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be found in the attached PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JISUN CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-0710. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 Browne can be reached at (571)270-0151. 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.
/JISUN CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/JESS WHITTINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666c