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
Status of Claims
Claims 1-7 of U.S. Application No. 18/899310 filed on 09/27/2024 have been examined.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Regarding claims 10, claim limitations “control” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, because it uses a non-structural term “part” coupled with functional languages “permit”, “control”, “display”, “halts” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the non-structural term is not preceded by a structural modifier. Since this claim limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, claims 10-17 are interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph limitation: “control part 40a…” (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, block 30, block 40a; paragraph: 0042)
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action. If applicant does not wish to have the claim limitation treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim so that it will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph. For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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 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)(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.
Claim 1-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kiyota et al. [US 2020/0291614 A1], hereinafter referred to as Kiyota.
As to Claim 1, Kiyota discloses an excavator comprising: an upper turning body ([See at least Fig.2 and 0072]); a lower traveling body ([See at least Fig.2 and 0072]); and a control part configured to permit changing of a parameter relating to control of the excavator by a remote operation from a management apparatus managing the excavator ([See at least 0048 and 0196]).
As to Claim 2, Kiyota discloses an excavator, wherein the control part permits the changing of the parameter when a state of the excavator satisfies a safety condition ([see at least 0056, 0057, 0061 and 0164]).
As to Claim 3, Kiyota discloses an excavator, wherein the safety condition includes at least one of a state in which an engine included in the excavator is turned off, a state in which an operation by an operation device of the excavator is disabled, or a state in which an operation lever included in the operation device is in neutral ([see at least Fig. 6A, 0204 and 0205]).
As to Claim 4, Kiyota discloses an excavator, wherein the control part causes a display device to display an approval screen for making an approval, upon receiving, from the management apparatus, an approval request requesting the approval for the changing of the parameter relating to the control of the excavator, and permits the changing of the parameter relating to the control of the excavator when the approval is made in the approval screen ([see at least Fig. 8, Fig. 9 and 0209]).
As to Claim 5, Kiyota discloses an excavator, wherein the control part causes a display device to display information indicating that the parameter is being changed by the remote operation by the management apparatus, while the parameter relating to the control of the excavator is being changed ([see at least Fig. 5, Fig. 9, 0222 and 00422]).
As to Claim 6, Kiyota discloses an excavator, wherein the control part causes the display device to also display an image captured by an imaging device ([see at least Fig. 5, Fig. 6A, 0140 0204 and 0207]).
As to Claim 7, Kiyota discloses an excavator, wherein the control part halts a process of changing the parameter when the excavator enters a state in which a safety condition is not satisfied, while the parameter relating to the control of the excavator is being changed ([see at least Fig. 5, Fig. 9, 0222 and 00422]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAZAN A SOOFI whose telephone number is (469)295-9189. The examiner can normally be reached on Flex schedule.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached on 572-272-1516. 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 would like assistance 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.
/YAZAN A SOOFI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668