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 .
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This is the first Office action on the merits for Application No. 18/872,489, filed 12/06/2024. Claims 1-8 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs’) received on 12/06/2024 and 06/10/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-7 are objected to because of the following informalities: the limitations “first motor and second motor” in the claims are unclear because it appeared that only one motor is being claimed in claim 1. Please replace the limitation “a motor” in line 5 of claim 1 with the limitation - -a motor assembly/device- - for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Adner et al. (US 6,688,481 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Adner discloses a crane having a turning body (4) that supports a boom (5), the crane comprising:
a travel body (i.e., lower traveling body) that has a frame (i.e., chassis 1) for supporting a front-side axle (figs. 2 and 3, i.e., front axle 2) and a rear-side axle (i.e., rear axle 3); and
a motor (i.e., electric motors 27, 28) that is disposed below the frame (1) and between the front-side axle (2) and the rear-side axle (3), the motor (27,28) being connected to the front-side axle (2) and the rear-side axle (3).
Regarding claim 2, Adner discloses the crane according to claim 1, wherein the motor includes a first motor (28) connected to the front-side axle (2) and a second motor (27) connected to the rear-side axle (3).
Regarding claim 3, Adner discloses the crane according to claim 2, further comprising:
a power supply unit (i.e., battery 32) that is provided in the travel body; and
a slip ring (fig. 2; col. 3, line 60 – col. 4, line 5, i.e., feedthrough ring 34; It is noted that the additional slip rings in Sekido (41) and Tokutome cited below under the pertinent art to show as evidence of using the term slip ring (MPEP 2131.01)) that supplies electric power of the power supply unit (32) to the turning body (4),
wherein the first motor (28) and the second motor (27) are disposed to face each other with a lower region of the slip ring (fig. 2; col. 3, line 60 – col. 4, line 5, i.e., feedthrough ring 34) interposed therebetween (shown in fig. 2).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adner as applied to claims 1-3 above.
Regarding claim 4, Adner discloses the crane according to claim 3, wherein the frame has a through hole (i.e., rotatable hole) surrounding the slip ring (fig. 2; col. 3, line 60 – col. 4, line 5, i.e., includes feedthrough ring 34), and the first motor (28) and the second motor (27) are disposed a region extending downward from the through hole (fig. 2; the two motors 27 and 28 are arranged to the sides of the feedthrough ring). However, Adner does not specifically teach the two motors at least partially overlap with a region extending downward from the through hole.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the rearrangement of having the two motors mounted closer to the region extending downward from the through hole is a matter of engineering design, suited to the intended use of the device. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (concluding that rearrangement of parts requires only routine skill in the art). Such a simple arrangement is utilized for the predictable result of compactness and reducing wiring complexity. Thus, having the motors in either arrangement would not change the function of the motors of crane and would perform equally well. Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for Adner to modify the mounting positions of the two motors to have them partially overlap with the region extending downward from the through hole, as rearrangement of parts are obvious modifications known to one skilled in the art.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adner as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Kaneko et al. (US 2013/0149093 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Adner discloses the crane according to claim 3, and further discloses
power electronics 23 disposed within the undercarriage 1 and supplies electric power via cables 24, 25, 26 to the electric motors and the electric powered produced by the generator 21 is supplied via cable 22 to the power electronics 23, col. 3, line 41 – col. 4, line 17). However, Adner does not specifically teach a first inverter and a second inverter and electrical cables connecting between the inverters and the motors. Power electronics, particularly inverter devices, are well recognized to a skilled person in the art for converting electrical power to the drive machines/motors from the battery or power supply to operate the vehicle.
Kaneko discloses a similar work vehicle includes two drive motors 21,22 and two inverters (i.e., inverters 1 and 2) electrically connected to the motors and an electric storage device or a battery 11 for providing power to the electric machines/motors 21,22 to operate and propel the work vehicle. See Figures 1-2 and 13.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the crane of Adner, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have two inverters provided alongside the first motor and the second motor, respectively, and are connected to the power supply unit or the battery unit as taught by Kaneko in order to independently control the torques and speeds of each motor under operation. Another advantage of doing so is that the total system shutdown of the work vehicle can be prevented if one of the two inverters is abnormal.
Further, it would have been also obvious to have the electrical cables connecting the first motor and the second motor to the first inverter and the second inverter routed so as not to pass through the lower region of the vehicle body for compactness. Doing so would provide the electrical communication between the electric motors, power electronics or inverters and battery unit of the electrical system of the work vehicle. It is noted that the electrical system of the work vehicle would be inoperative if the inverter devices, battery unit and electric motors are not electrically connected via cables.
Regarding claim 8, Adner discloses the crane according to claim 1, and further discloses power electronics 23 disposed within the undercarriage 1 and supplies electric power via cables 24, 25, 26 to the electric motors and the electric powered produced by the generator 21 is supplied via cable 22 to the power electronics 23, Col. 3, line 41 – Col. 4, line 17). However, Adner does not specifically teach an inverter that housed above the motor. Power electronics, particularly inverter devices, are well recognized to a skilled person in the art for converting electrical power to the drive machines/motors from the battery or power supply to operate the vehicle.
Kaneko discloses a similar work vehicle includes two drive motors 21,22 and two inverters (i.e., inverters 1 and 2) electrically connected to the motors and an electric storage device or a battery 11 for providing power to the electric machines/motors 21,22 to operate and propel the work vehicle. See Figures 1-2 and 13.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the crane of Adner, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have an inverter connected to the battery/power supply and the motor as taught by Kaneko in order to provide the controlled torques and speeds of the drive motor of the crane. It would have been further obvious to have the inverter housed above the motor and in the frame for compactness.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adner as applied to claims 1-3 above, in view of Kaneko et al. (US 2013/0149093 A1), and further in view of Couture et al. (US 4,516,117).
Regarding claim 6, as modified the crane according to claim 5, the modified crane of Adner and Kaneko does not specifically teach a junction box that provided above or below the inverters. Junction boxes are well recognized to a skilled person in the art for safely providing electrical power between the battery and high-voltage subsystems including inverters and motors.
Couture teaches a range controller for a crane includes a junction box 20 electrically connected to a shaft of a swing motor, see Figures 3-7 and col. 4, line 66 – col. 5, line 27.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the modified crane of Adner and Kaneko, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have a junction box connected to each of the inverters and provided above or below the first inverter and the second inverter and distributes electric power of the power supply or battery unit to the first inverter and the second inverter for the purpose of safely transmitting high-voltage power between the battery, motors, inverters and other high voltage subsystem.
Regarding claim 7, Adner discloses the crane according to claim 3, and further discloses
power electronics 23 disposed within the undercarriage 1 and supplies electric power via cables 24, 25, 26 to the electric motors and the electric powered produced by the generator 21 is supplied via cable 22 to the power electronics 23, Col. 3, line 41 – Col. 4, line 17). However, Adner does not specifically teach a first inverter and a second inverter and electrical cables connecting between the inverters and the motors and a junction box provided along the motors. Power electronics, particularly inverter devices, are well recognized to a skilled person in the art for converting electrical power to the drive machines/motors from the battery or power supply to operate the vehicle.
Kaneko discloses a similar work vehicle includes two drive motors 21,22 and two inverters (i.e., inverters 1 and 2) connected to the motors for providing power to the electric machines/motors 21,22 to operate and propel the work vehicle. See Figures 1-2 and 13.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the crane of Adner, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have two inverters integrated or attached to the first motor and the second motor as taught by Kaneko in order to independently control the torques and speeds of each motor under operation. Other advantages of having such arrangement are compactness and reducing wiring complexity.
Couture teaches a range controller for a crane includes a junction box 20 electrically connected to a shaft of a swing motor, see Figures 3-7 and col. 4, line 66 – col. 5, line 27.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the modified crane of Adner and Kaneko, with inverter-integrated motor, to have a junction box that is provided alongside each of the first motor and the second motor, respectively, and distributes power of the power supply unit to the first motor and the second motor as taught by Couture for the purpose of safely transmitting high-voltage power between the battery, motors, inverters and other high voltage subsystem. Junction boxes are well recognized to a skilled person in the art for safely providing electrical power to high-voltage subsystems, particularly in electric and hybrid work vehicles. Further, it would have been also obvious to have cables connecting the first motor and the second motor to the junction box are routed so as not to pass through the lower region for the purpose of compactness.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sekido (JP 2014/163190A) discloses a similar revolving construction machine includes a slip ring 41 and two inverters 64A,65A connected to the electric motors 10R,10L, see Figures 1 and 10 and machine translation attached; and
Tokutome et al. (US 2019/0300340 A1) discloses a mobile crane includes a slip ring 44 and a controller 41 connected by a CAN communication line 45 via the slip ring, see Figure 5 and para. [0056].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tinh T Dang whose telephone number is (571)270-1776. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at Mon-Friday from 8AM-4:30PM at (571) 270-5565. 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.
/TINH T DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655 September 29, 2026
