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 .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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sovik US 5,362,176 WO 2007/024135 (Olsen). Sovik discloses a paving machine (20) having an edge detection system comprising:
An edge detection sensor (42) such as a non-contact sensor that “can scan the edge region (14) of the compacted cold mat section (10) as the paver machine is moved alongside the cold mat section for producing a signal representative of the location of edge line (16). This signal from the sensing means (42) is then suitably processed in any suitable known manner”. For recording the position of the edge line (16) within the edge region (14) scanned by the sensing means (42). Wherein the width of the paving screed sections can be controlled relative to the sensed and transformed edge line data (16) as well as steering of the machine. Figs. 1-3; Col. 5, ln.33-Col. 4, ln. 50, Col. 8, ln. 29-33, Col. 8, ln. 63-Col. 9, ln. 60.
What Sovik does not disclose is the use of polar and cartesian coordinate systems. However Olsen teaches it is known the non-contact sensors “that is continuously scanning the horizon will provide data in Polar coordinates as amplitudes versus angles, as illustrated in the right hand part of the figure.
The display system displays the data in a cartesian coordinate system as pixels organized in rows on a screen…the system may include a processor that transforms the Polar data into the Cartesian grid, leaving vacant positions etc. In the inverse mapping approach, the system will compute the Polar coordinates that correspond to each position in the Cartesian grid and retrieve data (e.g. from a memory storing received data values) that appear in said Polar coordinate positions. The Polar coordinates are rounded to the nearest integer and used as addresses for retrieving data from memory”. See Page 3, last paragraph-Page Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the edge detection/screed width control system of Sovik with the non-contact sensor signal processing system/method taught by Olsen in order to improve display screen imaging and paving width control.
With respect to claims 2-12, 14-20 see Olsen pages 5-8.
With respect to claim 13 Sovik discloses a method of detecting an edge (16) of an edge region (14) of a roadway being paved by a paving machine (20) having an edge detection system. The method comprising:
Providing and causingan edge detection sensor (42) such as a non-contact sensor to “scan the edge region (14) of the compacted cold mat section (10) as the paver machine is moved alongside the cold mat section for producing a signal representative of the location of edge line (16). This signal from the sensing means (42) is then
suitably processed in any suitable known manner”. For recording the position of the edge line (16) within the edge region (14) scanned by the sensing means (42). Wherein the width of the paving screed sections can be controlled relative to the sensed and transformed edge line data (16) as well as steering of the machine. Figs. 1-3; Col. 5, ln.33-Col. 4, ln. 50, Col. 8, ln. 29-33, Col. 8, ln. 63-Col. 9, ln. 60.
What Sovik does not disclose is the use of polar and cartesian coordinate systems. However Olsen teaches it is known the non-contact sensors “that is continuously scanning the horizon will provide data in Polar coordinates as amplitudes versus angles, as illustrated in the right hand part of the figure. The display system displays the data in a cartesian coordinate system as pixels organized in rows on a screen…the system may include a processor that transforms the Polar data into the Cartesian grid, leaving vacant positions etc. In the inverse mapping approach the system will compute the Polar coordinates that correspond to each position in the Cartesian grid and retrieve data (e.g. from a memory storing received data values) that appear in said Polar coordinate positions. The Polar coordinates are rounded to the nearest integer and used as addresses for retrieving data from memory”. See Page 3, last paragraph-Page Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the method of edge detection/screed width control system of Sovik with the non-contact sensor signal processing system/method taught by Olsen in order to improve display screen imaging and paving width control.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND W ADDIE whose telephone number is (571)272-6986. The examiner can normally be reached on m-f 7:30-12:30, then 6-9pm.
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, Chris Sebesta can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you need help from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RAYMOND W ADDIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 7/24/2026
Prosecution Insights