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 .
________________________________________
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed September 9, 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
________________________________________
References Used
Reference 1 (Primary) - US8640627B1
Reference 2 - US20110083577A1
Reference 3 - US8733252B2
________________________________________
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 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.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
21. (L1) A system, comprising: (L2) an anchor; (L3) an assembly operably coupled to the anchor, the assembly comprising a first structure and a second structure extending between the anchor and the first structure so that the first structure is spaced from the anchor; (L4) a linearly-extending cable along which a trolley is adapted to ride, the cable being operably coupled to the first structure of the assembly that is spaced from the anchor such that tension is transferred between the cable and the first structure; and (L5) a transition portion supported by the anchor and via which the trolley is adapted to transfer between riding along the cable and riding along a rail portion supported by the anchor.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses a cable-to-rail trolley system. (L2) Support 4 is an anchor and may be a tree, a man-made structure, or another natural structure. (L3) Intermediate support 16 is a frame secured to support 4 that creates an offset from support 4. The cable attachment at the outer end of intermediate support 16 includes cable end 28, clamp 32, thimble 36, an eyelet, and a fastener. The attachment corresponds to the first structure, and the offset frame of intermediate support 16 corresponds to the second structure extending between support 4 and that attachment. (L4) Cable 6 extends linearly between supports and carries trolley 12. Cable end 28 is secured by clamp 32 and thimble 36 to intermediate support 16, such that the attachment and frame bear the tensile load of cable 6. Reference 2 corroborates this load path by disclosing tensioned cable 180 retained at support tower 120 by clamps 190 and 825, with the clamps carrying the cable load. (L5) Reference 1 discloses channel 20 and transfer rail 18 supported at support 4, with trolley 12 moving between cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. Reference 2 discloses the same type of transfer through transition tube 820 between cable 180 and guide track 840.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's cable-support and transition-tube teachings with Reference 1's anchor-mounted offset frame, cable, channel, transfer rail, and trolley because both references address guided trolley travel between flexible cable and rigid track structures. Reference 2's bore transition and tension-carrying clamps would have predictably preserved the cable load path while guiding the cable away from the trolley path, thereby producing a smooth and structurally supported cable-to-rail transfer in Reference 1's system.
________________________________________
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
22. The system of claim 21, (L6) wherein the assembly provides tension to the cable, and thus the cable is tensioned by the assembly, via the operable coupling of the cable to the first structure of the assembly.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 21 applies to the inherited limitations. (L6) Reference 1's cable attachment, including cable end 28, clamp 32, thimble 36, eyelet, fastener, and intermediate support 16, supports cable 6 and bears its tensile load through the attachment located at the outer end of the offset frame. Reference 2 expressly discloses clamps 190 and 825 retaining tensioned cable 180 and transferring the cable load into support tower 120. The combined support assembly therefore provides and maintains the cable tension through the operable coupling between the cable and the first attachment structure.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's load-carrying cable clamps at Reference 1's offset cable attachment because a tensioned trolley cable must transfer its load into the supporting anchor structure. The combination makes technical sense because Reference 1 supplies the offset frame and cable-end attachment while Reference 2 confirms the predictable use of clamps at a tower to retain cable tension and carry the cable load.
________________________________________
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
24. The system of claim 21, (L6) wherein the transition portion comprises an entry structure and a transition structure operably coupled thereto; (L7) wherein the entry structure comprises a first end, a second end, and an internal passageway extending between the first end and the second end; and (L8) wherein the cable is received in the internal passageway.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 21 applies to the inherited limitations. (L6) Reference 2's transition tube 820 is an entry structure coupled to guide track 840, which is the transition structure. (L7) Transition tube 820 has a cable-side first end, a guide-track-side second end, and a bore extending between those ends. (L8) Cable 180 passes through the bore of transition tube 820 as the cable is displaced away from the trolley path and guide track 840.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's bored transition tube 820 at Reference 1's cable-to-rail junction because the bore supports and guides cable 180 while moving it clear of the rigid track and trolley path. The combination would have predictably reduced interference and maintained a smooth transfer from Reference 1's cable 6 to transfer rail 18.
________________________________________
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
25. The system of claim 24, (L9) wherein the transition structure is operably associated with the second end of the entry structure; and (L10) wherein at least a portion of the entry structure is ramped between the cable and the transition structure.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 21 and 24 apply to the inherited limitations. (L9) Reference 2's guide track 840 joins and is operably associated with the track-side second end of transition tube 820. (L10) The shallow bevel of transition tube 820 forms a ramp between cable 180 and guide track 840. Bevel 822 and the tapered tube end gradually lift and align the trolley as it leaves cable 180 and enters guide track 840.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to provide Reference 1's cable-to-rail junction with Reference 2's shallow ramped transition-tube end because a gradual entry surface minimizes impact and misalignment when the trolley changes from a flexible cable to a rigid track. Reference 2 applies that geometry to the same cable-to-track transfer problem and therefore supplies a predictable improvement to Reference 1's transition.
________________________________________
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
26. The system of claim 21, (L6) wherein the rail portion is curved to facilitate turning or cornering of the trolley.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 21 applies to the inherited limitations. (L6) Reference 1 discloses transfer rail 18 configured to change trolley direction, including a curved rail arrangement. Reference 2 discloses guide track 840 as a rigid curve that carries the trolley through a turn and uses transition tube 820 at each end for entry and exit.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to configure Reference 1's supported transfer rail with the curved guide-track geometry of Reference 2 because both structures carry a trolley through a rigid track portion between cable spans. The curved rail would have predictably changed trolley direction while maintaining support and alignment through the corner.
________________________________________
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
27. The system of claim 21, (L6) further comprising the trolley.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 21 applies to the inherited limitations. (L6) Reference 1 expressly discloses trolley 12 riding along cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. Reference 2 likewise discloses trolley 200 and powered trolley 600 traveling through cable and rigid guide-track portions.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to include the disclosed trolley in the combined cable-to-rail system because the cable, transition, and rail structures of both references are expressly designed to guide that trolley. Including the trolley would have predictably performed the intended transfer operation.
________________________________________
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
28. The system of claim 27, wherein the trolley comprises: (L7) a motor adapted to propel the trolley along the cable and the rail portion; and (L8) a plurality of wheels, comprising: (L9) a carriage wheel adapted to roll along the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion; and (L10) a drive wheel driven by the motor and adapted to contact the cable and the rail portion to propel the trolley along the cable and the rail portion.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 21 and 27 apply to the inherited limitations. (L7) Reference 2 discloses motor 640 on powered trolley 600, and Reference 1 identifies trolley 12 as self-propelled across cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. (L8) Reference 1's trolley includes drive wheel 10 and anti-wobble wheel 74, which are a plurality of wheels. (L9) Anti-wobble wheel 74 acts as the carriage wheel: groove 96 rolls on cable 6, and outer surfaces 94 roll on channel 20 and transfer rail 18. (L10) Drive wheel 10 contacts cable 6 through cable-shaped profile 108 and contacts channel 20 and transfer rail 18 through its rigid-track contact surfaces. Reference 2 supplies motor 640 as the explicit drive source for the self-propelled wheel arrangement contemplated by Reference 1.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to drive Reference 1's self-propelled trolley with Reference 2's electric motor 640 because both references concern powered trolley travel on cable and rigid guide structures. The combination makes technical sense because Reference 1 supplies separate drive and stabilizing wheels that maintain contact through the changing cable and rail geometry, while Reference 2 supplies a known motor arrangement that predictably provides propulsion.
________________________________________
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
29. The system of claim 28, (L11) wherein the carriage wheel has a first profile and a second profile; (L12) wherein the first profile of the carriage wheel is contoured to cooperate with the cable; (L13) wherein the second profile of the carriage wheel is contoured to cooperate with the rail portion; (L14) wherein the first and second profiles of the carriage wheel enable the carriage wheel to transfer among the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion; and (L15) wherein the first and second profiles of the carriage wheel facilitate alignment of the trolley as the trolley rides along, and transfers among, the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 21, 27, and 28 apply to the inherited limitations. (L11) Reference 1's anti-wobble wheel 74 has groove 96 between two outer surfaces 94, thereby providing distinct cable and rigid-track profiles. (L12) Groove 96 is contoured to receive and roll on cable 6. (L13) Outer surfaces 94 are contoured to roll on channel 20 and transfer rail 18. (L14) Wheel 74 maintains rolling contact as trolley 12 moves among cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. (L15) Anti-wobble device 70, including wheel 74 and pivoting bar 72, maintains contact and reduces trolley wobble through the transfer, thereby facilitating alignment on each travel surface.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to retain Reference 1's complementary groove 96 and outer surfaces 94 on the carriage wheel in the powered system because those profiles are expressly designed to maintain rolling contact on the differently shaped cable and rigid channel. The profiles would have predictably stabilized and aligned the trolley while allowing the same wheel to cross the cable-to-rail transition.
________________________________________
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
30. The system of claim 29, (L16) wherein the drive wheel has a first profile and a second profile; (L17) wherein the first profile of the drive wheel is contoured to cooperate with the cable; (L18) wherein the second profile of the drive wheel is contoured to cooperate with the rail portion; (L19) wherein the first and second profiles of the drive wheel enable the drive wheel to transfer among the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion; and (L20) wherein the first and second profiles of the drive wheel further facilitate alignment of the trolley as the trolley rides along, and transfers among, the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 21 and 27-29 apply to the inherited limitations. (L16) Reference 1's drive wheel 10 has groove 82 and secondary profile 108, together with rigid-track contact surfaces and side walls 86. (L17) Secondary profile 108 is shaped as the top half of cable 6 and cooperates with the cable. (L18) Drive wheel 10 rides contact surface 34 or bottom wall 66 of channel 20 or 90 and transfer rail 18. (L19) The cable profile and rigid-track contact surface allow drive wheel 10 to transfer among cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. (L20) Side walls 86 cooperate with channel side walls 84 to contain and align drive wheel 10 while the wheel moves through the transition and rigid rail path.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to retain Reference 1's cable-shaped profile 108, rigid-track contact surfaces, and cooperating side walls 86 in the motor-driven wheel because those structures permit one powered wheel to maintain traction and alignment on both cable and rail. The arrangement would have predictably supported continuous propulsion through the transition supplied by the combined references.
________________________________________
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
31. The system of claim 27, (L7) wherein the trolley comprises an electrical conductor; (L8) wherein the motor is adapted to receive power from a power source via the electrical conductor; and (L9) wherein the trolley further comprises a brake assembly adapted to slow the trolley as it propels along the cable and the rail portion.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 21 and 27 apply to the inherited limitations. (L7) Reference 2's powered trolley 600 includes electrical power lines 645 routed through frame member 620. (L8) Power lines 645 conduct power from engine power supply compartment 630 to electric motors 640. (L9) Reference 2 discloses computerized regenerative braking and speed control for the powered trolley and also discloses passive braking at a transition exit. Reference 1 supplies the wheel path over cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18 on which the powered and braked trolley operates.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to provide Reference 1's self-propelled cable-to-rail trolley with Reference 2's power lines 645, power supply compartment 630, motor 640, and braking control because the conductors are required to deliver electrical power to the motor and braking is a known complement to powered trolley propulsion. The combination would have predictably controlled trolley speed and improved safe travel through cable-to-rail transitions.
________________________________________
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2, and further in view of Reference 3.
Claim Text
32. The system of claim 31, further comprising: (L10) a sensor associated with the trolley; (L11) wherein the sensor is adapted to detect a proximity of the trolley to another object or a location of the trolley within the system; and (L12) wherein the sensor is adapted to trigger an adjustment in the power received by the motor from the power source to adjust the propulsion of the trolley by the motor.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 21, 27, and 31 apply to the inherited limitations. (L10) Reference 3 discloses a sensing arrangement associated with trolley assembly 22 in which sensor flag 50 is mounted on trolley assembly 22 and cooperates with proximity sensors 52 and 54 along track 14. (L11) Sensors 52 and 54 detect the arrival, clearance, stopping position, and location of trolley assembly 22 through flag 50. (L12) Controllers 18 and logic controller 70 respond to the detected flag and sensor states by energizing or de-energizing bus bars 46, which supply or remove power from drive motor 42 and thereby start, continue, or stop trolley propulsion. Mounting the proximity detector on the trolley and its target on the track instead of mounting the target on the trolley and the detector on the track would preserve the same relative-position sensing function.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to add Reference 3's flag, proximity-sensor, controller, and switched-motor-power arrangement to the powered trolley of References 1 and 2 because Reference 2 already uses computerized propulsion and braking but does not detail location-responsive power switching. Reference 3 addresses the same motorized guided-trolley control problem and predictably starts, continues, or stops motor 42 according to trolley location and path occupancy. Selecting which relatively moving body carries the sensor and which carries its target would have been a predictable placement choice that preserves the disclosed sensing and control result.
________________________________________
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
33. (L1) A system, comprising: (L2) a trolley; (L3) a linearly-extending cable along which the trolley is adapted to ride; and (L4) a transition portion via which the trolley is adapted to transfer between riding along the cable and riding along a rail portion; wherein the trolley comprises: (L5) a motor adapted to propel the trolley along the cable and the rail portion; and (L6) a plurality of wheels, comprising: (L7) a carriage wheel adapted to roll along the cable and the rail portion; and (L8) a drive wheel driven by the motor and adapted to contact the cable and the rail portion to propel the trolley along the cable and the rail portion.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses a cable-to-rail trolley system. (L2) Trolley 12 travels over the disclosed course. (L3) Cable 6 extends linearly between supports and carries trolley 12. (L4) Channel 20 and transfer rail 18 provide a transition by which trolley 12 moves from cable 6 to a rigid rail portion, and Reference 2's transition tube 820 likewise transfers a trolley between cable 180 and guide track 840. (L5) Reference 2 discloses motor 640 on powered trolley 600, while Reference 1 expressly contemplates a self-propelled trolley across cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. (L6) Reference 1 discloses drive wheel 10 and anti-wobble wheel 74. (L7) Anti-wobble wheel 74 rolls on cable 6 through groove 96 and on channel 20 and transfer rail 18 through outer surfaces 94. (L8) Drive wheel 10 contacts cable 6 through cable-shaped profile 108 and contacts channel 20 and transfer rail 18 through its rigid-track contact surfaces; Reference 2 supplies motor 640 as the explicit drive source.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to drive Reference 1's self-propelled cable-to-rail trolley with Reference 2's motor 640 because both references address powered trolley travel through cable and rigid guide structures. Reference 1 supplies the drive and carriage wheel geometry that maintains contact on both substrates, and Reference 2 supplies a conventional motor implementation that would have predictably propelled the trolley through the transition.
________________________________________
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
34. The system of claim 33, (L9) wherein the carriage wheel has a first profile and a second profile; (L10) wherein the first profile of the carriage wheel is contoured to cooperate with the cable; (L11) wherein the second profile of the carriage wheel is contoured to cooperate with the rail portion; (L12) wherein the first and second profiles of the carriage wheel enable the carriage wheel to transition between the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion; and (L13) wherein the first and second profiles of the carriage wheel facilitate alignment of the trolley as the trolley rides along, and transitions between, the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 33 applies to the inherited limitations. (L9) Reference 1's anti-wobble wheel 74 has groove 96 between two outer surfaces 94. (L10) Groove 96 is contoured to receive and roll on cable 6. (L11) Outer surfaces 94 are contoured to roll on channel 20 and transfer rail 18. (L12) Wheel 74 maintains rolling contact as trolley 12 transitions between cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. (L13) Anti-wobble device 70, including wheel 74 and pivoting bar 72, maintains contact and reduces trolley wobble through the transition, thereby facilitating alignment on the cable and rail portions.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to retain Reference 1's groove 96 and outer surfaces 94 on the carriage wheel in the powered trolley because those complementary profiles are designed to roll on the differently shaped cable and rigid channel. The profiles would have predictably maintained trolley alignment and rolling contact throughout the cable-to-rail transition.
________________________________________
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
35. The system of claim 34, (L14) wherein the drive wheel has a first profile and a second profile; (L15) wherein the first profile of the drive wheel is contoured to cooperate with the cable; (L16) wherein the second profile of the drive wheel is contoured to cooperate with the rail portion; (L17) wherein the first and second profiles of the drive wheel enable the drive wheel to transition between the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion; and (L18) wherein the first and second profiles of the drive wheel facilitate alignment of the trolley as the trolley rides along, and transitions between, the cable, the transition portion, and the rail portion.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 33 and 34 apply to the inherited limitations. (L14) Reference 1's drive wheel 10 has groove 82 and secondary profile 108, together with rigid-track contact surfaces and side walls 86. (L15) Secondary profile 108 is shaped as the top half of cable 6 and cooperates with the cable. (L16) Drive wheel 10 rides contact surface 34 or bottom wall 66 of channel 20 or 90 and transfer rail 18. (L17) The cable profile and rigid-track contact surface allow drive wheel 10 to transition among cable 6, channel 20, and transfer rail 18. (L18) Side walls 86 cooperate with channel side walls 84 to contain and align drive wheel 10 while the trolley transitions to and rides along the rigid rail path.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to retain Reference 1's cable-shaped profile 108, rigid-track contact surfaces, and side walls 86 in the motor-driven wheel because those structures allow one powered wheel to maintain traction and alignment on cable and rail. The disclosed profiles would have predictably supported continuous propulsion through the combined transition system.
________________________________________
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
36. The system of claim 33, (L9) wherein the trolley comprises an electrical conductor; and (L10) wherein the motor is adapted to receive power from a power source via the electrical conductor.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 33 applies to the inherited limitations. (L9) Reference 2's powered trolley 600 includes electrical power lines 645 routed through frame member 620. (L10) Power lines 645 conduct electrical power from engine power supply compartment 630 to electric motors 640.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's power lines 645 in the powered trolley of the combined system because an electrical conductor is the ordinary and disclosed mechanism for transferring power from source compartment 630 to motor 640. Retaining that conductor would have predictably powered the motor while the trolley travels along the cable and rail portions supplied by Reference 1.
________________________________________
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
37. The system of claim 33, (L9) wherein the trolley further comprises a brake assembly adapted to slow the trolley as it propels along the cable and the rail portion.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 33 applies to the inherited limitations. (L9) Reference 2 discloses computerized regenerative braking and speed control for its powered trolley and also discloses passive braking at a transition exit. Reference 1 supplies the cable-to-rail wheel path over which the powered trolley is propelled and slowed.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's braking control on the powered trolley of Reference 1 because braking is a known complement to motorized propulsion and Reference 2 applies it to the same trolley-transport environment. The brake would have predictably limited trolley speed and improved controlled negotiation of the cable-to-rail transition.
________________________________________
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2, and further in view of Reference 3.
Claim Text
38. The system of claim 33, further comprising: (L9) a sensor associated with the trolley; (L10) wherein the sensor is adapted to detect a proximity of the trolley to another object or a location of the trolley within the system.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 33 applies to the inherited limitations. (L9) Reference 3 discloses a sensing arrangement associated with trolley assembly 22 in which sensor flag 50 is mounted on trolley assembly 22 and cooperates with proximity sensors 52 and 54 along track 14. (L10) Sensors 52 and 54 detect trolley arrival, clearance, stopping position, and location through flag 50. Mounting the proximity detector on the trolley and its target on the track instead of mounting the target on the trolley and the detector on the track would preserve the same relative-position sensing function.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to add Reference 3's flag and proximity-sensor arrangement to the powered trolley of References 1 and 2 because location and path-occupancy information permits controlled movement of a motorized trolley through guided-path sections. Reference 3 addresses that same control problem, and exchanging the positions of a proximity detector and its target on two relatively moving structures would have been a predictable placement choice producing the same location-detection result.
________________________________________
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2, and further in view of Reference 3.
Claim Text
39. The system of claim 38, (L11) wherein the sensor is adapted to trigger an adjustment in the power received by the motor from the power source to adjust the propulsion of the trolley by the motor.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 33 and 38 apply to the inherited limitations. (L11) Reference 3's controllers 18 and logic controller 70 respond to the states of sensors 52 and 54 by energizing or de-energizing bus bars 46. Bus bars 46 supply or remove power from drive motor 42, thereby starting, continuing, slowing by loss of drive power, or stopping trolley assembly 22 according to the detected trolley location and availability of the adjacent track section.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 3's sensor-responsive controller and switched bus-bar power with the motorized trolley of References 1 and 2 because the detected trolley location provides a direct control input for safe propulsion through successive guided-path portions. The combination would have predictably adjusted motor power to start or stop the trolley at controlled positions and avoid conflicting occupancy of adjacent track sections.
________________________________________
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
40. The system of claim 33, further comprising: (L9) an anchor, wherein the anchor supports the transition portion; and (L10) an assembly operably coupled to the anchor, the assembly comprising a first structure and a second structure extending between the anchor and the first structure so that the first structure is spaced from the anchor; (L11) wherein the assembly provides tension to the cable, and thus the cable is tensioned by the assembly, via engagement between the cable and the first structure of the assembly.
Analysis
The analysis of claim 33 applies to the inherited limitations. (L9) Reference 1's support 4 is an anchor that supports channel 20 and transfer rail 18 through intermediate support 16. (L10) Intermediate support 16 is an offset frame extending from support 4 to the cable attachment formed by cable end 28, clamp 32, thimble 36, eyelet, and fastener. The attachment corresponds to the first structure, and the offset frame corresponds to the second structure. (L11) That attachment engages cable 6 and transfers its tensile load through intermediate support 16 into support 4. Reference 2 further discloses tensioned cable 180 retained by clamps 190 and 825 at support tower 120, with the clamps carrying the cable load.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's load-carrying cable-clamp teaching at Reference 1's offset anchor assembly because the combined structure keeps the trolley path clear of support 4 while transferring cable tension into the support. Reference 1 supplies the anchor, offset frame, transition, and cable-end attachment, and Reference 2 confirms the predictable use of support-mounted clamps to retain a tensioned cable and carry its load.
________________________________________
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
42. The system of claim 40, (L12) wherein the transition portion comprises an entry structure and a transition structure operably coupled thereto; (L13) wherein the entry structure comprises a first end, a second end, and an internal passageway extending between the first end and the second end; (L14) wherein the cable is received in the internal passageway; (L15) wherein the transition structure is operably associated with the second end of the entry structure; and (L16) wherein at least a portion of the entry structure is ramped between the cable and the transition structure.
Analysis
The analyses of claims 33 and 40 apply to the inherited limitations. (L12) Reference 2's transition tube 820 is an entry structure coupled to guide track 840, which is the transition structure. (L13) Transition tube 820 has a cable-side first end, a guide-track-side second end, and a bore extending between those ends. (L14) Cable 180 passes through the bore of transition tube 820. (L15) Guide track 840 joins and is operably associated with the second end of transition tube 820. (L16) The shallow bevel of transition tube 820, including bevel 822, forms a ramp between cable 180 and guide track 840 and gradually lifts and aligns the trolley as it enters the rigid track.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's bored and ramped transition tube 820 in the anchor-supported transition of References 1 and 2 because the bore supports and displaces the cable while the shallow bevel provides gradual trolley entry into the rigid track. The combination would have predictably reduced cable interference, impact, and misalignment at the same cable-to-rail junction addressed by Reference 1.
________________________________________
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 41 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 23 and 41 require the tension provided to the cable through the first structure to be adjustable via the recited anchor-coupled assembly. References 1 and 2 disclose cable tension, cable-end attachment, and support-mounted clamps, but they do not disclose adjustment of cable tension through the claimed assembly. The other reviewed references do not cure that deficiency.
________________________________________
Claim Disposition
Canceled Claims: 1-20.
Rejected Claims - 35 U.S.C. 103: 21, 22, 24-40, and 42.
Objected-to Claims: 23 and 41.
Allowed Claims: None.
________________________________________
Conclusion
US20210245787A1 was not used because its inventor overlap creates an unresolved potential 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) issue, and the eligible References 1 and 2 provide a cleaner ground. US3935822 was not used because its strongest teachings concern a different trolley and conductor arrangement and do not improve the selected mapping of the current anchor, offset assembly, and cable-to-rail transition limitations.
References 1 and 2 provide the strongest located combination for the anchor, cable-support, transition, trolley, motor, wheel-profile, conductor, and braking limitations. Reference 3 is applied only to claims 32, 38, and 39 for the sensor-responsive trolley-location and motor-power control limitations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON C SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 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, Joseph Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/Jason C Smith/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights