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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6-10, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lanting et al as part of US 20120189374 A1, hereinafter referred to as Lanting.
Regarding Claim 1: Lanting teaches of a carrier for coupling an implement to a work vehicle (Fig. 1-2, implement carrier 42 couples a bucket 14 to front end loader 10), comprising:
a pair of brackets (Fig. 3, mounting plates 58, 62, 64, 66 comprise two brackets), each bracket defining a receptacle and having a latch receptacle (Fig. 3, the space between mounting plates 58, 64 and 62, 66 and above secondary latch rod 186 define a receptacle, and below secondary latch rod 186 defines the latch receptacle);
and a latch mechanism movable between a locked position and an unlocked position (Fig. 2 demonstrates the latch mechanism 120 in the latched position, Fig. 6 demonstrates latch mechanism 120 in the unlatched position), the latch mechanism including:
a first latch plate coupled to an actuator (Fig. 3, rod 160 may be considered a plate and is coupled to linear electric motor 140);
a first lock pin coupled to the first latch plate at a first end of the first latch plate (Fig. 3, latch rod 172 is coupled to the latch rod 160 at a first end via lever arm 166);
a second latch plate coupled to the first latch plate at a second end of the first latch plate (Fig. 3, latch rod 170 is coupled to latch rod 160 and extending to the opposite side to latch rod 172);
and a second lock pin coupled to the second latch plate at an end of the second latch plate opposed from the first latch plate (Fig. 3, latching portion 178 is integral to latch rod 170 opposed to the latch rod 160),
wherein, in the locked position, the first lock pin and the second lock pin are engaged with respective latch receptacles of respective brackets of the pair of brackets (Fig. 2-3, the latch mechanism 120 is engaged in holes 112 and 114, placing it in the latch receptacle in the latched position),
and wherein, in the unlocked position, the first lock pin and the second lock pin are at least partially withdrawn from the respective latch receptacles (Fig. 6, in the unlatched position, the latch rods 172 and 170 are withdrawn from their respective latch receptacles).
Regarding Claim 6: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 1.
Lanting further teaches wherein the first lock pin couples to the first latch plate and extends along an axis offset from a longitudinal axis of the first latch plate (Fig. 3, the central axis of the latch rod 172 is offset from the longitudinal axis of rod 160).
Regarding Claim 7: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 1.
Lanting further teaches wherein the second lock pin couples to the second latch plate and extends along an axis offset from a longitudinal axis of the second latch plate (Fig. 3, the central axis of the latch rod 170 is offset from the longitudinal axis of rod 160).
Regarding Claim 8: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 1.
Lanting further teaches wherein each bracket of the pair of brackets includes a pair of plates, the pair of plates being spaced apart to define the receptacle, the receptacle configured to receive a receiving flange of the implement (Fig. 3, mounting plates 58, 62, 64, 66 comprise two brackets; the space between mounting plates 58, 64 and 62, 66 define a receptacle within which the end of a link of the bucket linkage is placed).
Regarding Claim 9: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 8.
Lanting further teaches wherein a first bracket of the pair of brackets includes a latch bar slot on each plate of the respective pair of plates, the latch bar slot receiving the second latch plate (Fig. 3, the bracket defined as plates 64 and 58 comprise holes 108 and 106 to receive latch rod 172).
Regarding Claim 10: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 8.
Lanting further teaches wherein each plate includes a latch bore, wherein latch bores of respective plates of respective brackets are coaxially aligned and configured to receive one of the first lock pin or the second lock pin (Fig. 3, each bracket further comprises receiving comprise holes 106, 108 and 112, 114 to receive latch rod 172 and 170).
Regarding Claim 18: Lanting teaches a carrier for coupling an implement to a work vehicle (Fig. 1-2, implement carrier 42 couples a bucket 14 to front end loader 10), comprising:
a pair of vehicle brackets configured to couple to a pair of loader arms of the work vehicle (Fig. 1, left and right arms 30 fix the frame of the loader 10 to the vehicle);
a pair of implement brackets, each implement bracket defining a space to receive a mounting feature of the implement and having a latch bore (Fig. 3, mounting plates 58, 62, 64, 66 comprise two brackets);
an upper cross rod;
a lower cross rod, wherein the upper cross rod and the lower cross rod separate the vehicle brackets of the pair of vehicles brackets and the implement brackets of the pair of implement brackets (Fig. 1-2, pin 32 separates the arms 30 and upper cross member 46 separates the brackets defined by mounting plates 58, 64 and 62, 66);
a latch mechanism movable between a locked position and an unlocked position (Fig. 2 demonstrates the latch mechanism 120 in the latched position, Fig. 6 demonstrates latch mechanism 120 in the unlatched position), the latch mechanism including:
a latch plate extending transversely to the carrier (Fig. 3, rod 160 may be considered a plate that extends transversely to the carrier);
an actuator coupled to the latch patch and configured to transition the latch mechanism between the locked position and the unlocked position (Fig. 3, rod 160 is coupled to linear electric motor 140, which actuates to transition the latch mechanism 120 between the unlatched and latched positions);
a first lock pin coupled to a first end of the latch plate (Fig. 3, latch rod 172 is coupled to the latch rod 160 at a first end via lever arm 166);
and a second lock pin coupled to a second end of the latch plate (Fig. 3, latch rod 170 is coupled to latch rod 160 on a different, second end),
wherein, in the locked position, the first lock pin and the second lock pin are received within respective latch bores of respective implement brackets (Fig. 2-3, the latch mechanism 120 is engaged in holes 108, 112, 106, and 114 in the latched position),
and wherein, in the unlocked position, the first lock pin and the second lock pin are at least partially withdrawn from the respective latch bores (Fig. 6, in the unlatched configuration, the latch rods 172 and 170 are withdrawn from their respective holes).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 2-3 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanting in view of Ravindran as part of US 20150330053 A1, hereinafter referred to as Ravindran.
Regarding Claim 2: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 1.
While Lanting does teach of linear actuation, it does not teach of a hydraulic cylinder comprising a check valve.
Ravindran teaches of a carrier for coupling an implement to a work vehicle (Ravindran: Paragraph 77: the coupler assembly couples a vehicle to an implement) comprising an actuator to transition a latch mechanism between a locked and unlocked position (Ravindran: Fig. 12-15, rear locking member 51 moves between a locked and unlocked position), wherein the actuator is a hydraulic cylinder, and wherein the latch mechanism further includes a check valve (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to substitute the linearly actuating motor of Lanting with a hydraulic cylinder as taught by Ravindran to operate the inward and outward movement of the locking members of Lanting, as hydraulic cylinders are known in the art for linear movement of locking members (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139). Such a modification would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of utilizing a hydraulic actuator comprising check valves to move the locking assembly (MPEP 2143, Subsection I, B).
Regarding Claim 3: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 1.
Lanting does not explicitly teach wherein the actuator provides a force to maintain the latch mechanism in the locked position.
As described in claim 2, Ravindran teaches of a carrier for coupling an implement to a work vehicle (Ravindran: Paragraph 77: the coupler assembly couples a vehicle to an implement) comprising an actuator to transition a latch mechanism between a locked and unlocked position (Ravindran: Fig. 12-15, rear locking member 51 moves between a locked and unlocked position), wherein the actuator provides a force to maintain the latch mechanism in the locked position (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the check valves 137 and 139 maintain pressure to lock the coupler assembly 31 to hold an implement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to substitute the linearly actuating motor of Lanting with a hydraulic cylinder as taught by Ravindran to provide a force to maintain the latch mechanism position of Lanting, as hydraulic cylinders are known in the art for linear movement of locking members (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139). Such a modification would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of providing a force to maintain the latch mechanism in the locked position (MPEP 2143, Subsection I, B).
Regarding Claim 20: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 18.
Lanting does not teach of a hydraulic cylinder, nor does Lanting explicitly teach wherein the actuator provides a force to maintain the latch mechanism in the locked position.
As described above in claims 2 and 3, Ravindran teaches of a carrier for coupling an implement to a work vehicle (Ravindran: Paragraph 77: the coupler assembly couples a vehicle to an implement) comprising an actuator to transition a latch mechanism between a locked and unlocked position (Ravindran: Fig. 12-15, rear locking member 51 moves between a locked and unlocked position), wherein the actuator is a hydraulic cylinder, the hydraulic cylinder providing a locking force to maintain the latch mechanisms in the locked position and including a check valve to prevent unlocking due to leaking (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139 which maintain pressure to lock the coupler assembly 31 to hold an implement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to substitute the linearly actuating motor of Lanting with a hydraulic cylinder as taught by Ravindran, as hydraulic cylinders are known in the art for linear movement of locking members (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139). Such a modification would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of providing a force to maintain the latch mechanism in the locked position with a hydraulic cylinder comprising check valves (MPEP 2143, Subsection I, B).
Claim 4 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanting in view of Kollmann as part of US 11396733 B2, hereinafter referred to as Kollmann.
Regarding Claim 4: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 1.
While Lanting does teach of a position indicator of locking and unlocking (Lanting: Paragraph 42: LED indicator 240), it is not a mechanical indicator that comprises a shield plate extending between the brackets as described.
Kollmann teaches of a coupler between an implement and a work vehicle (Col. 3, line 27-37, the quick change coupler system couples and uncouples implements from a vehicle), further comprising a shield plate (Kollmann: Fig. 8, casing 18), the shield plate having features indicative of a first indicator position and a second indicator position (Kollmann: Fig. 8-10, signaling member 17 moves between a first indicating position and second indicator position), wherein the latch mechanism further includes an indicator that aligns with the first indicator position when in the unlocked position and aligns with the second indicator position when in the locked position (Kollmann: casing 18 comprises a signaling member 17, which moves between indicating a locking position and unlocking position based on the position of the coupling member 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to modify the disclosure of Lanting to utilize a mechanical signaling means, such as that taught by Kollmann, as mechanical signaling means are known in the art (Kollmann: Col. 1, line 52-62, the mechanical signaling member improves safety by allowing monitoring of the locking state). Such a modification would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of signaling to an operator of the locked and unlocked status of the latching mechanism.
Regarding Claim 19: Lanting teaches of the apparatus described in claim 18.
While Lanting does teach of a position indicator of locking and unlocking (Lanting: Paragraph 42: LED indicator 240), it is not a mechanical indicator that comprises a shield plate extending between the brackets as described.
Kollmann teaches of a coupler between an implement and a work vehicle (Col. 3, line 27-37, the quick change coupler system couples and uncouples implements from a vehicle), further comprising a shield plate (Kollmann: Fig. 8, casing 18), the shield plate having features indicative of a first indicator position and a second indicator position (Kollmann: Fig. 8-10, signaling member 17 moves between a first indicating position and second indicator position), wherein the latch mechanism further includes an indicator that aligns with the first indicator position when in the unlocked position and aligns with the second indicator position when in the locked position (Kollmann: casing 18 comprises a signaling member 17, which moves between indicating a locking position and unlocking position based on the position of the coupling member 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to modify the disclosure of Lanting to utilize a mechanical signaling means, such as that taught by Kollmann, as mechanical signaling means are known in the art (Kollmann: Col. 1, line 52-62, the mechanical signaling member improves safety by allowing monitoring of the locking state). Such a modification would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of signaling to an operator of the locked and unlocked status of the latching mechanism.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanting in view of Villarreal as part of US 10273650 B1, hereinafter referred to as Villarreal.
Regarding Claim 11: Lanting teaches of a latch mechanism for a carrier (Lanting: Fig. 1-2, implement carrier 42 couples a bucket 14 to front end loader 10), comprising:
a first latch plate having a first end and a second end separated by a center point (Lanting: Fig. 3, rod 160 may be considered a plate, comprising a first and second end with a center point therebetween);
a second latch plate coupled to the first latch plate at the first end (Lanting: Fig. 3, latch rod 170 is coupled to rod 160 at a second end);
a locking state indicator coupled to the first latch plate at the second end (Lanting: Paragraph 42, LED indicator 240 is coupled to motor 140, and therefore rod 160 at the first end);
a first lock pin coupled to the first latch plate at the second end (Lanting: Fig. 3, latch rod 172 is coupled to the latch rod 160 at a first end via lever arm 166);
a second lock pin coupled to the second latch plate (Lanting: Fig. 3, latch rod 170 is coupled to latch rod 160 on an opposite side to latch rod 172);
and an actuator configured to transition the latch mechanism between a locked position and an unlocked position (Lanting: Fig. 3, rod 160 may be considered a plate and is coupled to linear electric motor 140, which moves latch rods 172 and 170 between the latched and unlatched positions).
Lanting does not teach of the actuator being coupled to a central portion of the first latch plate.
Villarreal teaches of a latch mechanism for a carrier (Villarreal: Fig. 2, latching carrier 8 couples loader 10 to bucket 52), comprising:
a first latch plate having a first end and a second end separated by a center point (Villarreal: Fig. 6, latch system 112 has a first end and second end separated by a center section);
a second latch plate coupled to the first latch plate at the first end (Villarreal: Fig. 6-7, flange 222 is coupled to the latch system 112 at a first end);
a first lock pin coupled to the first latch plate at the second end;
a second lock pin coupled to the second latch plate (Villarreal: Fig. 6-7 , pins 186 are coupled to the latch system 112 at the first end and to the flange 222);
and an actuator coupled to the first latch plate at the center point, the actuator configured to transition the latch mechanism between a locked position and an unlocked position (Villarreal: Fig. 6-7, handle 188 is positioned at a central point of latch system 112 and moves pins 186 between a latched and unlatched position).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to relocate the position of the actuator from the end of the first latch plate as taught by Lanting to a centralized location on the first latch plate as taught by Villarreal, as mere rearrangement of parts between known configurations without modifying the operation of the individual elements of the apparatus is not patentably distinct. Such a modification would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of operating a latching mechanism between a latched and unlatched position via movement of an actuator coupled to a central portion of the first latch plate (MPEP 2144.04, Subsection VI, C)
Regarding Claim 17: Lanting in view of Villarreal teaches of the apparatus of claim 11.
Lanting further teaches wherein the first lock pin and the second lock pin extend along respective axes offset from a longitudinal axis of the first latch plate or second latch plate (Lanting: Fig. 3, the central axis of the latch rod 172 is offset from the longitudinal axis of rod 160 and the central axis of the latch rod 170 is offset from the longitudinal axis of rod 160).
Villarreal also teaches wherein the first lock pin and the second lock pin extend along respective axes offset from a longitudinal axis of the first latch plate or second latch plate (Fig, 6-7, the central axis of pins 186 are offset from latch system 122 and flange 222).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanting in view of Villarreal, further in view of Ravindran.
Regarding Claim 12: Lanting in view of Villarreal teaches of the apparatus of claim 11.
While Lanting does teach of linear actuation, Lanting in view of Villarreal does not teach of a hydraulic cylinder.
Ravindran teaches of a carrier for coupling an implement to a work vehicle (Ravindran: Paragraph 77: the coupler assembly couples a vehicle to an implement) comprising an actuator to transition a latch mechanism between a locked and unlocked position (Ravindran: Fig. 12-15, rear locking member 51 moves between a locked and unlocked position), wherein the actuator is a hydraulic cylinder, and wherein the latch mechanism further includes a check valve (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to substitute the linearly actuating motor of Lanting in view of Villarreal with a hydraulic cylinder as taught by Ravindran to operate the inward and outward movement of the locking members of Lanting, as hydraulic cylinders are known in the art for linear movement of locking members (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139). Such a modification would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of utilizing a hydraulic actuator comprising check valves to move the locking assembly (MPEP 2143, Subsection I, B).
Regarding Claim 13: Lanting in view of Villarreal, further in view of Ravindran teaches of the apparatus of claim 12.
In light of the modifications described above in claim 12, Ravindran further teaches wherein a locking force for the latch mechanism, when in the locked position, is provided by the hydraulic cylinder (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the check valves 137 and 139 maintain pressure to lock the coupler assembly 31 to hold an implement).
Regarding Claim 14: Lanting in view of Villarreal teaches of the apparatus of claim 13.
In light of the modifications described above in claim 13, Ravindran further teaches further comprising a check valve to prevent unlocking due to leaking (Ravindran: Paragraph 117, the hydraulic assembly actuator 43 of the coupler assembly 31 comprises check valves 137 and 139).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 15 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.
Regarding claim 5, while examples of latch plates and mechanical indication means are known in the art, no such examples were found wherein the latch plate, coupled to the actuator at a mount point, includes a first projection and a second projection respectively extending from the mount point. To read such details into prior art references, alone or in combination, would rely on an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 15, while the actuator is positioned between a first and second end of the latch plate as taught by Villarreal, and the actuator has a mounting means therein to couple the actuator to the latch pate, it is explicitly described to be bores in the latch plate, not arms or extended members. To read the detail of “a first and second arm” extending from the center point, wherein the actuator is positioned between said arms, into the teaching of Villarreal or any other referenced prior art, would rely on an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Claim 16 is similarly objected as being reliant on claim 15.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Villarreal as part of EP 3569772 A1 teaches of a carrier for coupling an implement to a work vehicle, comprising a pair of brackets, each bracket defining a receptacle and having a latch receptacle and a latch mechanism movable between a locked position and an unlocked position, the latch mechanism including a first latch plate coupled to an actuator, a first lock pin coupled to the first latch plate at a first end of the first latch plate, a second latch plate coupled to the first latch plate at a second end of the first latch plate and a second lock pin coupled to the second latch plate at an end of the second latch plate opposed from the first latch plate wherein, in the locked position, the first lock pin and the second lock pin are engaged with respective latch receptacles of respective brackets of the pair of brackets, and wherein, in the unlocked position, the first lock pin and the second lock pin are at least partially withdrawn from the respective latch receptacles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVAN ANTHONY BREGEL whose telephone number is (571)272-0922. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:30 Eastern, M-F.
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, Christopher J Sebesta can be reached at (571)272-0547. 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.
/EVAN A BREGEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights