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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 6/16/26 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art currently of record under 35 U.S.C. 103. As the amendments would be an obvious rendition of the prior art of record.
Applicant presents new amendments which they argue overcome the prior art. Examiner is not persuaded that the newly amended claims overcome the prior art and has maintained his rejection with an alternative rejection due to the claim language reciting the specific sequence of the valve not being taught by the prior art (the valve positions are all present just in a different order). Examiner acknowledges that during the interview Applicant’s representative and Examiner did discuss that Applicant’s valve configuration was slightly different than that of the prior art. However, Applicant has not sufficiently placed limitations of valve details to distinguish the amended claim from the prior art, instead relying on general broad amendments of such details which are more functional than structural in nature. Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s assertion of the prior art not allowing fluid to pass through the valve in the analogous position to Applicants. Examiner suggests placing additional structural language on the valve such as claiming that the valve has a pilot port passage on the valve in combination with the valve being 8 way/4 position valve to distinguish itself over the prior art which is a 6-way/4 position valve. Therefore, given the lack of structural details provided by the amended claims, Examiner believes the prior art of record still teaches the newly amended limitations and has maintained his rejection for this reason.
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(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa et al., Japanese Patent Publication JP 2000-054423 (hereinafter "Nakagawa").
In Reference to Claim 1:
Nakagawa discloses a hydraulic control device (Figure 1 work machine with hydraulic system), 6 (hydraulic circuit) , 7 ( electrical control) and 10 (control logic) , comprising: a switching control valve (48 or 49) configured to switch a supply and discharge state of hydraulic oil; at least one electromagnetic proportional valve (51, 53, 55 and 57) configured to be used for a switching operation of the switching control valve (48 or 49); a control unit (65) configured to control an operation of the electromagnetic proportional valve (51, 53, 55, and 57) based on an operation command of an operation tool (58); and a mode switching switch (62) configured to switch a control mode of the control unit between a first mode and a second mode, wherein the operation tool (58) is capable of being operated to a one-side region, a neutral region (neutral position), and an other-side region (floating side; accelerated dumping) , wherein the switching control valve is capable of being switched between a one- side operation position where the switching control valve is switched in response to an operation of the operation tool (58) from the neutral region to the one-side region, a neutral position where the switching control valve is switched when the operation tool is not operated, an other-side first operation position where the switching control valve is switched when the operation tool is operated to the other-side region, and an other-side second operation (lowering side: Dumping function) position where the switching control valve is switched when the operation tool is operated from the neutral region to the other-side region, which other side second operation position different from the other-side first operation position, and wherein the control unit is configured to; supply a current value corresponding to the other-side first operation position (floating side: accelerated dump) to the electromagnetic proportional valve (53 and 57) when the operation tool (58) is operated from the neutral position to the other-side region in the first mode, and supply a current value corresponding to the other-side second operation position to the electromagnetic proportional valve when the operation tool is operated from the neutral position to the other-side region in the second mode. See also, Paragraph [0009-0016] And wherein the other-side second operation position achieves a low-speed operation state by allowing waste fluid flow to pass through the switching control valve to be discharged. See, Figure 6 which shows that in the position the fluid leaving the actuators passes through the switching control valve as well thereby meeting the claim as constructed.
Nakagawa fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one side operation position, the neutral position, the other side first operation postion and the otherside second operation position are arranged in this order. Nakagawa discloses all the same respective positions and the same connections between the actutator/ open center bypass port on across the switching control valve, but does not disclose the switching control valve having said respective postitions in the specific order as recited by the newly amended limitation.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the valve of Nakagawa which already contains all 4 positions just in an alternative order/configuration to be in the respective order as recited by Applicant in the newly amended claim because such a decision is merely a design choice of the positions within the valve. Applicant has failed to provide any specific advantage to having the valves in said positional order/configuration and Nakagawa can accomplish the same exact functions albeit in a different positional requirement by the operator tool as that of applicants.
In Reference to Claim 2:
Nakagawa further discloses wherein the switching control valve (48 and 49):switches the supply and discharge state of hydraulic oil with respect to a hydraulic actuator (25 and 31) from a hydraulic pump (47), switches the supply and discharge state to operate the hydraulic actuator (25 and 31) in a first operation direction at the one-side operation position (rising side and tilt side) , switches the supply and discharge state to operate the hydraulic actuator in a first operation state in a second operation direction at the other-side first operation position (floating side: accelerated dumping side), and switches the supply and discharge state to operate the hydraulic actuator in a second operation state different from the first operation state in the second operation direction at the other- side second operation position (lowering side; dumping side) . See, Paragraph [0015 and 0016]. See, Figure 6.
In Reference to Claim 3:
Nakagawa further discloses wherein the hydraulic actuator (31) is a hydraulic cylinder , the first operation state is a high-speed operation state ( accelerated dumping) where the hydraulic cylinder is operated at a high speed, and the second operation state is a low-speed operation state (dumping) where the hydraulic cylinder is operated at a low speed. See, Paragraph [0016] and Figure 6 and 10.
In Reference to Claim 4:
Nakagawa further discloses wherein the hydraulic cylinder (31) is configured to be of a reciprocating type, and wherein the switching control valve (49) is configured such that return oil from the hydraulic cylinder while the switching control valve is switched to the other-side second operation position joins pressurized oil supplied to the hydraulic cylinder. See, Figure 6.
In Reference to Claim 5:
Nakagawa further discloses wherein the hydraulic actuator (25) is a hydraulic cylinder ,hydraulic oil from the hydraulic pump (47) is supplied to a first port for operating the hydraulic cylinder in a first operation direction in the hydraulic cylinder at the one-side operation position (rising),hydraulic oil from the hydraulic pump is supplied to a second port for operating the hydraulic cylinder in a second operation direction in the hydraulic cylinder at the other-side first operation position (floating) , and supply of hydraulic oil from the hydraulic pump (47) to the first port and the second port is blocked, and the first port and the second port are caused to communicate with each other to be connected to a drain oil passage through which hydraulic oil is discharged to a tank at the other- side second operation position. See, Figure 6.
In Reference to Claim 6:
Nakagawa further discloses wherein the switching control valve (48;49) is configured to switch an operation position by slide-operating a spool with a hydraulic pilot operation pressure, and wherein the at least one electromagnetic proportional valve comprises a plurality of electromagnetic proportional valves (53; 55), as the electromagnetic proportional valve, a one- side electromagnetic proportional valve (53 and 57) configured to change a pilot operation pressure for slide- operating the spool on one side and an other-side electromagnetic proportional valve configured to change a pilot operation pressure for slide-operating the spool on an other side are provided. See, Figure 6.
In Reference to Claim 7:
Nakagawa further discloses wherein the operation tool (58) is configured of a swing-operable operation lever, and wherein the mode switching switch (62) is configured of a switch provided on a grip portion (37) of the operation tool to be finger-operable.
In Reference to Claim 8:
Nakagawa discloses wherein the other side region is provided on the opposite side of the one side region across a neutral position interposed therebetween, the other side region is divided into to function positions to allow two differing states.
Examiner notes it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Nakagawa such that the configuration on the actuation lever contain two functions positions corresponding to the two different functions states that are located on opposing or different sides of the natural position, instead of being on the same side of the neutral position as such a modification is a simple design choice of placement of the functions.
As such it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Nakagawa produce a hydraulic control device wherein the other-side region of the operation tool (58), an other-side first region located on a neutral region side and an other-side second region located on a side opposite to the neutral region are set, the mode switching switch (62) is configured to switch the control mode of the control unit to a third mode, and wherein in the third mode, the control unit is configured to; supply the current value corresponding to the other-side first operation position to the electromagnetic proportional valve (51, 53, 55, and 57) when the operation tool (58)is operated in the other- side first region, ands upply the current value corresponding to the other-side second operation position to the electromagnetic proportional valve(51, 53, 55, and 57) when the operation tool is operated in the other- side second region for the reason stated above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL S. COLLINS whose telephone number is (313)446-6535. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00-5:30.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-4648. 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.
/DANIEL S COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights