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 .
The current application relates to PCT/JP2023/034515, a foreign application priority data filed on Sept. 28, 2022.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/12/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive to overcome the rejection. Examiner responds to the Applicant’s argument as the following reasons:
Regarding the Claimed Rejection Under 103: Applicant argued that the cited references (Kishimoto and Sakai do not teach the claims’ amendment subject matter. Examiner disagrees to the Applicant’s argument. Below is an updated rejection.
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(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishimoto (20160160470) in view of Sakai (JP2016074326)
With regard to claim 1, Kishimoto discloses a work machine comprising: a traveling unit; a work implement mounted to the traveling unit; a parking brake; and a controller (a work vehicle 1 comprises a frame 2, a working implement 3, traveling wheels 4 and 5, a driving cab 6, and etc., see [0035]+, an engine 21, a controller 27, and etc., see [0039]+). The operations of the controller 27 as shown in Fig.5A that an anomaly detected in step s20, activate emergency travelling mode in step S50, see [0084]-[0086]+ that is equivalent to “when the controller detects a fault that allows the work machine to remain operable”. The controller 27 carries out control the engine rotation speed does not exceed a predetermined upper limit value Nlmt3, the controller 27 executes steps of disengage clutch, see [0087]+ & Fig. 5B for cancel operation of the work implement.
Kishimoto is silent that the controller restricts operation of the work implement in a state in which where the parking brake is released when detecting a fault signal.
Sakai disclose a work vehicle as shown in Fig.1. The work vehicle includes a control unit 140, a braking system, and etc. When the parking brake 36 is in the released state, the control unit 140 notifies the operator of an error based on the piston rod 114 does not enter the unlocked position after a predetermined time elapsed, the mechanism control process is terminated, holds member 61, swing arm 56, and etc. (see page 11). Wherein, the member 61 & the swing arm 56 are equivalent as the work vehicle’s implements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kishimoto by including to control of holding work vehicle’s implements operation in which the parking brake being released state as taught by Sakai. The combination of Kishimoto and Sakai in an adapted work vehicle’s system for improving performance efficiency and safety.
With regard to claim 2, Sakai teaches that the work machine according to claim 1, wherein when the controller detects the fault, in a state in which where the parking brake is applied, the controller allows a release of restriction on operation of the work implement (the control unit determines whether or not the transmission shift position is parking, opens the valve for the work implements operation, see page 10-11).
With regard to claim 6, Sakai teaches that the work machine according to claim 1, further comprising:
a hydraulic actuator configured to drive the work implement (the hydraulic system steers the wheels, the engine and the upper working body, see page 2); and
a restricting valve configured to stop a supply of hydraulic oil to the hydraulic actuator (the controller puts the valves into a shut-off state, see page 11),
when the controller detects the fault in the state in which the parking brake is released, the controller controlling the restricting valve to stop the supply of hydraulic oil to the hydraulic actuator so as to restrict the operation of the work implement (when the parking brake 36 is in the released state, the posture of the piston rod does not change to the unlocked posture. Therefore, the control unit notifies the operator of an error, see page 11).
With regard to claim 7, Sakai teaches that the work machine according to claim 2 further comprising:
a hydraulic actuator configured to drive the work implement (The upper working body 30 has a boom device supported by a swivel base 31 are driven by a hydraulic motor, see page 3);
a restricting valve configured to stop a supply of hydraulic oil to the hydraulic actuator (valves 125, 126 being in a shut-off state that blocks air flow into and out of the chamber, see page 9); and
a restriction-operating section configured to be operated by an operator, the restriction-operating section being configured to restrict or release the restriction on the operation of the work implement the cabin 35 comprises an operation unit which has a steering, a shift lever, a brake pedal, and etc. are controlled by an operator see page 3),
when the controller detects the fault,
in the state in which the parking brake is released, the controller controlling the restricting valve to stop the supply of hydraulic oil to the hydraulic actuator, so as to restrict the operation of the work implement (when the parking brake 36 is in the released state, the posture of the piston rod does not change to the unlocked posture. Therefore, the control unit notifies the operator of an error, see page 11), and
in the state in which the parking brake is applied, the controller releasing a stop on the supply of hydraulic oil to the hydraulic actuator by the restricting valve, upon receipt of a signal for releasing the restriction on the operation of the work implement from the restriction- operating section (the control unit determines whether or not the transmission shift position is parking, opens the valve for the work implements operation, see page 10-11).
With regard to claim 8, Kishimoto teaches that the work machine according to claim 6, further comprising:
a work-implement valve configured to adjust the supply of hydraulic oil to the hydraulic actuator based on a pilot hydraulic pressure (valves adjust the tilt angle in the working implements pumps so that the pressure differential before and after the working implements, see [0043]+); and
a pilot valve configured to adjust a supply of hydraulic oil for the pilot hydraulic pressure to the work-implement valve (the boom swings up and down by the lift cylinder expanding and contracting due to hydraulic oil from the working implement pump 23, wherein the pump 23, see [0036]+. The working implement pump pressure detecting the discharge pressure of hydraulic oil from the working implement pump, see [0042]+)),
the restricting valve stopping the supply of hydraulic oil to the hydraulic actuator by stopping the supply of hydraulic oil for the pilot hydraulic pressure to the work- implement valve (each of the clutch control valve VP and VR controlled using command signals from the controller 27 which controls the clutch being on (engaged) or off (disengaging) of oil, see [0019]+ & [0064]+).
With regard to claim 9, Kishimoto discloses a control method for a work machine including a traveling unit and a work implement mounted to the traveling unit, the control method comprising:
a fault detection step of detecting a fault that allows the work machine to remain operable (operations of the controller 27 as shown in Fig.5A that an anomaly detected in step s20, activate emergency travelling mode in step S50, see [0084]-[0086]+); The controller 27 carries out control the engine rotation speed does not exceed a predetermined upper limit value Nlmt3, the controller 27 executes steps of disengage clutch, see [0087]+ & Fig. 5B for cancel operation of the work implement.
Kishimoto is unclear that the controller imposing a restriction on operation of the work implement in a state in which where the parking brake is released when detecting a fault signal.
Sakai disclose a work vehicle as shown in Fig.1. The work vehicle includes a control unit 140, a braking system, and etc. When the parking brake 36 is in the released state, the control unit 140 notifies the operator of an error based on the piston rod 114 does not enter the unlocked position after a predetermined time elapsed, the mechanism control process is terminated, holds member 61, swing arm 56, and etc. (see page 11). Wherein, the member 61 & the swing arm 56 are equivalent as the work vehicle’s implements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kishimoto by including to control of holding work vehicle’s implements operation in which the parking brake being released state as taught by Sakai. The combination of Kishimoto and Sakai in an adapted work vehicle’s system for improving performance efficiency and safety.
With regard to claim 10, Kishimoto teaches that the work machine according to claim 2, further comprising:
a work implement operating lever configured to be operated by an operator to operate the work implement (an operator selects a transmission pattern for the power train by regulating the transmission regulating members, see [0053]-[0054]+); and
a restriction operating lever configured to be operated by the operator to selectively output a first signal or a second signal to the controller, the first signal being a signal for imposing the restriction on the operation of the work implement and the second signal being a signal for releasing the restriction on the operation of the work implement (when the operator is notified of an anomaly, the operator determines whether or not to select the emergency travelling mode, and etc., see [0086]-[0090]+).
With regard to claim 11, Kishimoto teaches that the work machine according to claim 10, wherein when the controller detects the fault in the state in which the parking brake is released, the controller transitions to a state of imposing the restriction on the operation of the work implement upon receiving the first signal from the restriction operating lever (see Fig. 5A of step S10 thru step S57).
With regard to claim 12, Kishimoto teaches that the work machine according to claim 10, wherein when the controller detects the fault in the state in which the parking brake is released, the controller does not release the restriction on the operation of the work implement even after receiving the second signal from the restriction operating lever (see Fig. 5A of step S10 thru step S60).
With regard to claim 13, Kishimoto teaches that the work machine according to claim 10, wherein when the controller detects the fault in the state in which the parking brake is applied and the release of the restriction on the operation of the work implement is allowed, the controller releases the restriction on the operation of the work implement upon receiving the second signal from the restriction-operating section (see [0081]-[0083]+).
With regard to claim 14, Kishimoto teaches that the work machine according to claim 10, wherein when the controller detects the fault while the restriction on the operation of the work implement is not imposed and the parking brake is in a released state, the controller transitions to a state of imposing the restriction on the operation of the work implement after receiving the first signal from the restriction operating lever (see Fig. 5A).
With regard to claim 15, Sakai teaches that the work machine according to claim 1, wherein the fault is state in which a safety function of the work machine has failed (when the parking brake 36 is in the released state, the posture of the piston rod does not change to the unlocked posture. Therefore, the control unit notifies the operator of an error, see page 11).
With regard to claim 16, Sakai teaches that the control method according to claim 9, further comprising: allowing a release of the restriction in a state in which the parking brake is applied and the fault is detected (the parking brake in the restricted state restricts the traveling of the lower traveling body 20, see page 10-11).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NGA X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5217. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30AM - 2:30PM.
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, JELANI SMITH can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.
NGA X. NGUYEN
Examiner
Art Unit 3662
/NGA X NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights