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 .
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 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As to Claim 1, the claim recites “a control device that causes the pile driver to perform the piling while the traveling device is traveling”. It is unclear how it is possible to drive a pile while, for example, a truck is moving, since after driving a first portion of the pile, the pile would be stuck in a spot unable to move. The claim does not provide enough details reciting how this is possible and these details seems to be essential to make the claim clear. Appropriate correction is required.
As to Claim 18, the claim recites “driving a pile by the pile driver while the main body is moving in the first direction”. It is unclear how it is possible to drive a pile while, for example, a truck is moving, since after driving a first portion of the pile, the pile would be stuck in a spot unable to move. The claim does not provide enough details reciting how this is possible and these details seems to be essential to make the claim clear. Appropriate correction is required.
The dependent claims are also rejected for depending on rejected independent claims.
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 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schnell (U.S. Patent No. 4,257,488).
As to Claim 1, Schnell discloses a piling machine comprising:
A main body unit (6) including a traveling device (Hull of floating derrick 6);
A pile driver (12) that performs piling (1);
A moving device (29) that is connected to the main body unit (6) and moves the pile driver (7); and
A control device (41) that causes the pile driver (12) to perform the piling while the traveling device is traveling (“Traveling” is being interpreted as “moving”. The floating derrick 6 will move up and down and side to side due to water currents and waves).
As to Claim 18, Schnell discloses a method of piling, comprising:
Moving a main body (6) in a first direction (The floating derrick 6 will move up and down and side to side due to water currents and waves);
Moving (via 29) a pile driver (12) that performs piling (1) to offset of the main body (6) in the first direction; and
Driving a pile (1) by the pile driver (12) while the main body (6) is moving in the first direction (“Traveling” is being interpreted as “moving”. The floating derrick 6 will move up and down and side to side due to water currents and waves).
Claims 1, 2, 6-9, 12, 13, 16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirata et al (U.S. Patent No. 3,722,600).
As to Claim 1, Hirata discloses a piling machine comprising:
A main body unit (5) including a traveling device (15);
A pile driver (10) that performs piling (4);
A moving device (9) that is connected to the main body unit (5) and moves the pile driver (10); and
A control device (12) that causes the pile driver (10) to perform the piling while the traveling device is traveling (The traveling device 15 moves downward as the pile driver vibrates the pile as illustrated by comparing Figures 1 and 2).
As to Claim 2, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the control device (12) causes the moving device (9) to move the pile driver (10) in a first direction (Vertically) while the pile driver (10) performs the piling, and the first direction includes a component in a direction opposite (Vertical is the opposite direction to horizontal) to a second direction (Horizontally) in which the main body unit (Elements 21 of the main body unit move horizontally) moves while the pile driver performs the piling.
As to Claim 6, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the moving device (9) is a linkage mechanism including a mechanism (7, 8) that converts a rotational motion into a linear motion.
As to Claim 7, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the moving device (9) is a sliding mechanism (The line 9 slides around winches 7, 8 to change direction) that linearly moves the pile driver (10) with respect to the main body unit (5).
As to Claim 8, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 7 (Refer to Claim 7 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the pile driver (10) is provided on a table configured to change an attitude with respect to the sliding mechanism by using an actuator (11).
As to Claim 9, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the pile driver includes a maintenance mechanism (Connection between 9 and 10) that maintains perpendicularity of the pile driver (10).
As to Claim 12, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the main body unit (5) includes a suction unit (19) that sucks a pile, a gripping unit (22) that grips the pile, and a first supply device (20) that supplies the pile to the pile driver.
As to Claim 13, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Hirata also discloses comprising a holding unit (21) that holds a pile (4) in an upright state, the holding unit being movable between a first position and a second position (via 20), wherein the holding unit receives supply of the pile (4) in the upright state when located at the first position (When retracted), and supplies the pile held by the holding unit (21) to the pile driver when being at the second position (When extended and gripping the pile).
As to Claim 16, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the control device (12) does not stop the traveling device (15) while the piling is being performed.
As to Claim 18, Hirata discloses a method of piling, comprising:
Moving a main body (5) in a first direction (Compare Figures 1 and 2. The first direction is being interpreted as downwards);
Moving a pile driver (10) that performs piling to offset movement (“To offset” can be interpreted as “balance”, “equalize” or “equilibrize”. In this case the pile driver 10 also move downwards to balance, equalize or equilibrize the downward movement of the main body 5) of the main body (5) in the first direction; and
Driving a pile (4) by the pile driver (10) while the main body (5) is moving in the first direction (Main body 5 and pile driver 10 move downwardly to drive the pile as Figures 1 and 2 show).
As to Claim 19, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 17 (Refer to Claim 17 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the driving the pile (4) by the pile driver (10) does not stop movement of the main body (5) in the first direction while the pile is being driven (The pile driver and main body move downward together so the pile driver does not stop the main body while driving the pile).
As to Claim 20, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 18 (Refer to Claim 18 discussion). Hirata also discloses wherein the main body (5) moves in the first direction (Downwards) at a constant speed.
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 3-5, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al (U.S. Patent No. 3,722,600) alone.
As to Claim 3, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). However, Hirata is silent about wherein, while the pile driver performs the piling, a speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is equal to a speed at which the pile driver moves in a direction opposite to the second direction. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that elements 21 can move horizontally and the pile driver 10 can move vertically at the same speed if the operator chooses or by design choice. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the pile driver perform the piling, a speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is equal to a speed at which the pile driver moves in a direction opposite to the second direction since such a modification is a matter of design choice and would still yield the same result of driving the pile.
As to Claim 4, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 2 (Refer to Claim 2 discussion). However, Hirata is silent about wherein a speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is determined based on at least one of a distance between two piles to be consecutively driven by the pile driver, a driving length of the piles, or a pile driving speed of the pile driver. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the speed of which elements move is an obvious matter of design choice. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is determined based on at least one of a distance between two piles to be consecutively driven by the pile driver, a driving length of the piles, or a pile driving speed of the pile driver since such a modification is a matter of design choice and would still yield the same result of driving the pile.
As to Claim 5, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 4 (Refer to Claim 4 discussion). However, Hirata is silent about wherein the speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is determined based on a time until the pile driver returns to an initial position after performing the piling while moving in the first direction from the initial position and a time until a next pile is set in the pile driver that has returned to the initial position. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the speed of which elements move is an obvious matter of design choice. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is determined based on a time until the pile driver returns to an initial position after performing the piling while moving in the first direction from the initial position and a time until a next pile is set in the pile driver that has returned to the initial position since such a modification is a matter of design choice and would still yield the same result of driving the pile.
As to Claim 15, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 3 (Refer to Claim 3 discussion). However, Hirata is silent about wherein the speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is determined based on at least one of a distance between two piles to be consecutively driven by the pile driver, a driving length of the piles, or a pile driving speed of the pile driver. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the speed of which elements move is an obvious matter of design choice. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the speed at which the main body unit moves in the second direction is determined based on at least one of a distance between two piles to be consecutively driven by the pile driver, a driving length of the piles, or a pile driving speed of the pile driver since such a modification is a matter of design choice and would still yield the same result of driving the pile.
As to Claim 17, Hirata as modified teaches the invention of Claim 15 (Refer to Claim 15 discussion). Hirata as modified also teaches wherein the control device (12) is configured to move the traveling device (15) in a first direction at a constant speed.
Claims 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al (U.S. Patent No. 3,722,600) in view of Waxse (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0108598).
As to Claim 10, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). However, Hirata is silent about a detection device that detects a state of a pile driven by the pile driver; and an adjustment device that adjusts a way of driving a pile scheduled to be driven, based on a detection result of the detection device. Waxse discloses a detection device (130) that detects a state of a pile (112) driven by the pile driver (114); and an adjustment device (140A, 140B) that adjusts a way of driving a pile scheduled to be driven, based on a detection result of the detection device. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a detection device that detects a state of a pile driven by the pile driver; and an adjustment device that adjusts a way of driving a pile scheduled to be driven, based on a detection result of the detection device. The motivation would have been to monitor the pile driving.
As to Claim 11, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). However, Hirata is silent about a detection device that detects a state of a pile driven by the pile driver; and a display device that displays information regarding correction of the pile driven by the pile driver, based on a detection result of the detection device. Waxse discloses a detection device (130) that detects a state of a pile (112) driven by the pile driver (114); and a display device (140A, 140B) that displays information regarding correction of the pile driven by the pile driver, based on a detection result of the detection device. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a detection device that detects a state of a pile driven by the pile driver; and a display device that displays information regarding correction of the pile driven by the pile driver, based on a detection result of the detection device. The motivation would have been to monitor the pile driving.
Claim 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al (U.S. Patent No. 3,722,600) in view of Lumier (U.S. Patent No. 3,850,317).
As to Claim 14, Hirata discloses the invention of Claim 13 (Refer to Claim 13 discussion) However, Hirata is silent about an inclined platform that sequentially supplies the pile to a vicinity of the first position along an inclined surface; and a supply mechanism that supplies the pile supplied to the vicinity of the first position to the holding unit while raising the pile to the upright state. Lumier discloses an inclined platform (12) that supplies piles (2) along an inclined surface; and a supply mechanism (1) that supplies piles (2). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an inclined platform that sequentially supplies the pile to a vicinity of the first position along an inclined surface; and a supply mechanism that supplies the pile supplied to the vicinity of the first position to the holding unit while raising the pile to the upright state. The motivation would have been to provide a storage platform.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10:00AM to 6:00PM EST.
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, AMBER ANDERSON can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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.
/EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678