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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites “a fourth boom section extending between the second boom section and the fourth boom section” in lines 1-2. It is unclear how the fourth boom section can extend from is capable of extending between the second boom section and itself. For examination purposes, the claim will be interpreted as a fourth boom section extending from the second boom section.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (KR 101977910 B1, hereafter Choi) in view of Ragnarsson et al. (US 2023/0406677 A1) and Ekshinge et al. (US 2020/0369498 A1, hereafter Ekshinge).
Regarding Claim 1, Choi discloses a boom system comprising:
a base assembly (Figure 1: base 12);
a boom assembly coupled to the base assembly (Figure 1: boom assembly 20), the boom assembly including:
a boom including a plurality of boom sections (Figure 2: there are multiple boom sections 22, 24, 26);
a first implement (Figure 2: first implement 46) coupled to a first boom section of the plurality of boom sections;
a second implement (Figure 2: second implement 62) coupled to a second boom section of the plurality of boom sections; and
the lateral distance between the first implement and the second implement is configured to vary (Figures 1 and 2 show the boom frames capable of extending and retracting and the distance between the first and second implement varies because they are coupled to the boom frames); and
a controller communicably coupled with the boom assembly, wherein the controller is configured to control and prevent the lateral distance between the first implement and the second implement (Paragraph 22: the controller controls the crane, there are physical limits that on extension and retraction of the crane that the controller controls).
Choi does explicitly disclose an actuator configured to vary a lateral distance between the first implement and the second implement; and
the controller is configured to control the actuator to prevent the lateral distance between the first implement and the second implement from falling below a minimum distance.
Ragnarsson discloses a telescoping boom vehicle that uses a controller to control multiple piston/cylinders as an actuator which has a first portion coupled to a first boom section and a second portion coupled to the second boom section (Figure 1: actuators 32 and 68, first sections 28, 54, second section 34, 24, Paragraphs 45 and 58, Paragraph 42: the actuators are controlled by internal controls) for the purpose of being able to increase or decrease the overall length of the implement (Paragraphs 45 and 58).
Ekshinge discloses a boom assembly that uses an implement with a pair of forks and proximity and load sensors (Figure 5: forks 12, proximity sensors 50, load sensors 52). The proximity sensors are able to measure the distance between components and the load sensors can determine the load of the picked object (Paragraph 32). If a predetermined threshold is reached on these sensors the operation of the device can be prevented (Paragraph 32) for the purpose of improving operational safety (Paragraph 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to
modify the invention of Choi by including a controller-controlled actuator between each boom section as disclosed by Ragnarsson for the purpose of being able to increase or decrease the overall length of the implement and including the proximity and load sensors disclosed by Ekshinge that can prevent operation of the device when a threshold is reached (such as when the implements reach a certain distance) for the purpose of improving operational safety.
Regarding Claim 2, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 1. The combination as applied in claim 1 discloses the first implement and the second implement are configured to each support a common load (Choi Figures 2 and 4: the glass window frame 100 is a common load).
Regarding Claim 3, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 1. The combination as applied in claim 1 discloses the second implement includes a hook (Choi Figure 1: second hook portion 46).
The combination as applied in claim 1 does not disclose the first implement includes a pair of forks.
Ekshinge discloses a boom assembly that uses an implement with a pair of forks (Figure 2: boom assembly 10, forks 12) for the purpose of carrying load (Paragraph 24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to
modify the combination as applied in claim 1 by replacing first implement with the fork implement disclosed by Ekshinge for the purpose of carrying load.
Regarding Claim 4, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 1. The combination as applied in claim 1 discloses the actuator is configured to extend the first boom section relative to the second boom section (Choi Figures 1 and 2: show the boom sections 22, 24, 26 extending relative to each other, the extending would be allowed by the actuators disclosed by Ragnarsson).
Regarding Claim 5, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 4. The combination as applied in claim 4 discloses the actuator is a linear actuator including a first portion coupled to the first boom section and a second portion coupled to the second boom section (Ragnarsson Figure 1: actuators 32 and 68, first sections 28, 54, second section 34, 24, Paragraphs 45 and 58).
Regarding Claim 6, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 3. The combination as applied in claim 3 does not explicitly disclose at least two of the plurality of boom sections are configured to extend and retract independently of each other (Ragnarsson Figure 2, Ragnarsson Paragraph 67: the boom sections can retract independently from each other).
Ragnarsson discloses a telescoping boom vehicle that uses controllable actuators that are able to extend and retract independently from each other (Figures 1-3, and 7-9: the actuators 26, 52, 58 are controllable and operatable independently from the other actuators, Paragraphs 44, 53, 55) for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle (Paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the combination as applied in claim 3 by allowing every actuator to be independently controlled as disclosed by Ragnarsson to extend and retract for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle.
Regarding Claim 7, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 1. The combination as applied in claim 1 discloses the actuator is a first actuator (Ragnarsson Figure 1: first actuators 32 and 68), further comprising a second actuator coupled to the boom and the base assembly and configured to rotate the boom assembly relative to the base assembly to raise the boom (Choi Figure 1: second actuator 28, base assembly 10, 12, 14, 16, Choi Paragraph 25).
Regarding Claim 8, Choi discloses a boom system comprising:
a base assembly (Figure 1: base 12);
a boom assembly (Figure 1: boom assembly 20) including:
a first boom section coupled to the base assembly (Figures 1 and 2: 22), and
a second boom section extendable relative to the first boom section (Figures 1 and 2: 24); and
a third boom section extendable relative to the second boom section (Figures 1 and 2: 26);
a first implement coupled to the first boom section (Figure 2: first implement 46)
a second implement coupled to the third boom section (Figure 2: third boom section 26, second implement 62), the second implement including a hook (Paragraph 28); and
a second actuator configured to rotate the first boom section relative to the base assembly to raise the boom assembly (Figure 2: 28, Paragraph 25).
Choi additionally discloses using placing implements on respective boom sections (Figure 1: first implement 46 is connected to first boom section and second implement 62 is connected to the third boom section) to for the purpose of raising objects in a stable way (Paragraph 40).
Choi does not disclose a first implement coupled to the second boom section, the first implement including at least one of a cradle or lift forks; and
a first actuator configured to extend the second boom section relative to the first boom section;
Ragnarsson discloses a telescoping boom vehicle that uses a controller to control multiple piston/cylinders as an actuator which has a first portion coupled to a first boom section and a second portion coupled to the second boom section (Figure 1: actuators 32 and 68, first sections 28, 54, second section 34, 24, Paragraphs 45 and 58, Paragraph 42) for the purpose of being able to increase or decrease the overall length of the implement (Paragraphs 45 and 58).
Ekshinge discloses a boom assembly that uses an implement with a pair of forks on a second boom section (Figure 2: boom assembly 10, forks 12, first boom section 20, second boom section 66) for the purpose of carrying load and being able to lift the implement (Paragraphs 24, 37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to
modify the invention of Choi by including an implement on the second boom section as disclosed by Choi and Ekshinge for the purpose of raising objects in a stable way and being able to lift the implement, replacing the implement on the second boom portion with the fork implement disclosed by Ekshinge for the purpose of carrying the load, and including an actuator between each boom section and allowing the controller to control these actuators as disclosed by Ragnarsson for the purpose of being able to increase or decrease the overall length of the implement.
Regarding Claim 9, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 8. The combination as applied in claim 8 discloses the forks are configured to cooperate with the hook to restrict rotation of a load suspended from the hook (Choi Figures 2 and 3: multiple implements are used to restrict the rotation of the load 100, Choi Paragraph 40).
Regarding Claim 10, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 9. The combination as applied in claim 9 discloses the first implement is configured to receive the load when the third boom section is retracted (Choi Figures 1 and 4: the combination as applied in claim 9 would have the first implement be the fork implement disclosed by Ekshinge and be capable of holding a load similar to the Applicant’s Figure 7).
Regarding Claim 11, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 8. The combination as applied in claim 8 discloses the first boom section, the second boom section, and the third boom section are coaxial about a longitudinal centerline (Choi Figures 1, 2, and 4: show all boom section are coaxial), and wherein the second boom section is configured to retract into an inner cavity of the first boom section (Choi Figures 1 and 2, Choi Paragraph 25).
Regarding Claim 12, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 8. The combination as applied in claim 8 discloses a third actuator configured to extend the third boom section relative to the second boom section (Choi Figures 1 and 2: show the third boom section 26 is configured to extend relative to the second boom section 24).
Regarding Claim 13 as best interpreted, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 8. The combination as applied in claim 8 does not disclose the boom includes a fourth boom section extending between the second boom section and the fourth boom section.
Ragnarsson discloses a telescoping boom vehicle that uses six boom sections (Figure 1: 28, 34, 36, 48, 54, 24) for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle (Paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the combination as applied in claim 8 by including a fourth boom section extending between the second boom section and the fourth boom section for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle.
Regarding Claim 14, Choi discloses a boom system comprising:
a boom including a plurality of boom sections (Figure 2: boom 20, boom sections 22, 24, 26);
a linear actuator coupled to the boom, the linear actuator including a second linear actuator configured to vary an angle of the boom relative to a work surface (Figure 2: second linear actuator 28, Paragraph 25);
a first implement coupled to a first boom section of the plurality of boom sections (Figure 2: first boom section 26, first implement 62);
a second implement coupled to a second boom section of the plurality of boom sections (Figure 2: second boom section 22, second implement 46); and
a controller configured to control extension of the boom sections and the angle of the boom relative to the work surface (Paragraph 22: controller controls crane, Paragraph 25: drive cylinder 28 controls angle of boom).
Choi does not disclose a plurality of linear actuators coupled to the boom, the plurality of linear actuators including a first linear actuator configured to cause the boom to extend; and
a controller configured to communicate with the linear actuators to control extension of the boom sections, and
wherein the controller is configured to maintain a minimum lateral distance between the first implement and the second implement
Ragnarsson discloses a telescoping boom vehicle that uses a controller to control multiple piston/cylinders as an actuator which has a first portion coupled to a first boom section and a second portion coupled to the second boom section (Figure 1: actuators 32 and 68, first sections 28, 54, second section 34, 24, Paragraphs 45 and 58, Paragraph 42: the actuators are controlled by internal controls) for the purpose of being able to increase or decrease the overall length of the implement (Paragraphs 45 and 58).
Ekshinge discloses a boom assembly that uses an implement with a pair of forks and proximity and load sensors (Figure 5: forks 12, proximity sensors 50, load sensors 52). The proximity sensors are able to measure the distance between components and the load sensors can determine the load of the picked object (Paragraph 32). If a predetermined threshold is reached on these sensors the operation of the device can be prevented (Paragraph 32) for the purpose of improving operational safety (Paragraph 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to
modify the invention of Choi by including a controller-controlled actuator between each boom section as disclosed by Ragnarsson for the purpose of being able to increase or decrease the overall length of the implement and including the proximity and load sensors disclosed by Ekshinge that can prevent operation of the device when a threshold is reached (such as when the implements reach a certain distance) for the purpose of improving operational safety.
Regarding Claim 15, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 14. The combination as applied in claim 14 discloses the first boom section is an upper boom section defining a distal end of the boom (Choi Figure 2: first boom section 26).
Regarding Claim 16, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 15. The combination as applied in claim 15 discloses the plurality of boom sections further includes a lower boom section defining a proximal end of the boom (Choi Figure 2: lower boom section 22);
the second boom section is an intermediate boom section positioned between the upper boom section and the lower boom section (Choi Figure 2: second boom section 24); and
the controller is configured to control at least one of the linear actuators such that the upper boom section extends relative to the intermediate boom section to maintain the minimum lateral distance between the first implement and the second implement (Ekshinge Figure 5: forks 12, proximity sensors 50, load sensors 52, Ekshinge Paragraph 32).
Regarding Claim 17, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 15. The combination as applied in claim 15 discloses the plurality of boom sections further includes a lower boom section defining a proximal end of the boom (Choi Figure 2: lower boom section 22).
The combination as applied in claim 15 does not disclose wherein the controller is configured to control the linear actuators such that the upper boom section remains retracted until all of the other boom sections, other than the lower boom section, are fully extended (the combination as applied in claim 15 does disclose the actuators are able to retract independently from each other, Ragnarsson Paragraph 67).
Ragnarsson discloses a telescoping boom vehicle that uses controllable actuators that are able to extend and retract independently from each other (Figures 1-3, and 7-9: the actuators 26, 52, 58 are controllable and operatable independently from the other actuators, Paragraphs 44, 53, 55) for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle (Paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to
modify the combination as applied in claim 15 by allowing every actuator to be independently controlled as disclosed by Ragnarsson to extend and retract for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle.
Regarding Claim 18, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 15. The combination as applied in claim 15 discloses the plurality of boom sections further includes a lower boom section defining a proximal end of the boom (Choi Figure 2: lower boom section 22).
The combination as applied in claim 15 does not disclose the controller is configured to control the linear actuators such that each boom section remains retracted until each more proximal boom section, other than the lower boom section, is fully extended.
Ragnarsson discloses a telescoping boom vehicle that uses controllable actuators that are able to extend and retract independently from each other (Figures 1-3, and 7-9: the actuators 26, 52, 58 are controllable and operatable independently from the other actuators, Paragraphs 44, 53, 55) for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle (Paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to
modify the combination as applied in claim 14 by allowing every actuator to be independently controlled as disclosed by Ragnarsson to extend and retract for the purpose of manipulating and handling of material on the ground and/or in close proximity to the boom vehicle.
Regarding Claim 19, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 14. The combination as applied in claim 14 discloses the second implement includes a hook (Choi Figure 2: second implement 46, Choi Paragraph, Choi Paragraph 31).
The combination as applied in claim 14 does not disclose the first implement includes a pair of forks.
Ekshinge discloses a boom assembly that uses an implement with a pair of forks (Figure 2: boom assembly 10, forks 12) for the purpose of carrying load (Paragraph 24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to
modify the combination as applied in claim 14 by replacing first implement with the fork implement disclosed by Ekshinge for the purpose of carrying load.
Regarding Claim 20, Choi in view of Ragnarsson and Ekshinge disclose the limitations of claim 19. The combination as applied in claim 19 does discloses a weight sensor communicably coupled to the controller and configured to measure a load on at least one of the hook or the pair of forks, wherein the controller is configured to limit an extension of the boom based on the load (Ekshinge Figure 5: forks 12, load sensors 52, Ekshinge Paragraph 32: the combination as applied in claim 19 uses the load sensors disclosed by Ekshinge to prevent operation of the vehicle when a threshold is reached).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bennett (US 11572005 B2) discloses a boom assembly with multiple implements, Ding et al. (CN 113788414 A) discloses a telescoping boom assembly with multiple implements, Liu (CN 109537978 A) discloses a boom arm that uses two different tools, Murphy (US 3765544 A) discloses a boom arm that uses multiple implements on different boom sections).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN TRAC whose telephone number is (571)272-8528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571) 272-7805. 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.
/J.K.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights