DETAILED ACTION
Application Status
Claims 1-11 are pending and have been examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 10/23/2024 has been reviewed and considered.
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)(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.
(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, 4-6, 8, and 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(2) as being anticipated by Jacobs (US 4025085 A).
With respect to claim 1, Jacobs discloses: a pivot mechanism, comprising: a base portion (3, Fig. 3); a pivot portion (1) attached to the base portion in a pivotable manner; and a restoration mechanism configured to generate a restoring force (“the torque created by the novel stabilizer…”, Col. 7, LL. 14-21) the magnitude of which varies (see “an additional amount of torque…”, Col. 7, LL. 5-10) in accordance with a pivot angle of the pivot portion and that acts to restore the pivot portion to a neutral state (shown in Fig. 2) when the pivot angle of the pivot portion falls in a first angular range (angles with the cam follower still in the cam recess).
With respect to claim 4, Jacobs discloses the pivot mechanism according to claim 1, wherein the restoration mechanism is configured such that when the pivot angle falls in the first angular range, the restoration mechanism generates a force that increases in magnitude (see “an additional amount of torque…”, Col. 7, LL. 5-10) with the increase in the pivot angle. Regarding, “with the increase in the pivot angle”, roller (22) tends to move out of the recess as the pivot angle increases, and as the roller moves out of the recess, additional torque is provided to resist such movement. Accordingly, as the pivot angle increases, there is an increased restoration torque/force (see Col. 7, LL. 6-21).
With respect to claim 5, Jacobs discloses the pivot mechanism according to claim 1, wherein the restoration mechanism includes a cam surface (13/14, Fig. 2) provided on either of the pivot portion and the base portion, a cam follower (22) in contact with the cam surface, and an urging member (28) urging the cam follower along an imaginary straight line connecting a pivot axis of the pivot portion and the cam follower.
Note, cam follower (22) moves in an arc because of its connection to arm (21); however, at any one instance, the urging member (28) urges the cam follower in a single direction (straight line) that is tangent to the arc through which it travels and perpendicular to the arm itself. From Fig. 2, it is evident that a line drawn representing the direction in which the cam follower is urged connects a pivot axis of the pivot portion and the cam follower.
With respect to claim 6, Jacobs discloses the pivot mechanism according to claim 5, wherein the cam surface (13/14) is provided on the pivot portion (1), the cam surface includes a first cam-surface segment (cam surface engaging cam follower when cam follower is still in the recess), the first cam-surface segment coming in contact with the cam follower when the pivot angle falls in the first angular range, and the first cam surface segment is shaped to be increased in distance thereto from the pivot axis (through point 2 ) with increase in distance thereto from a neutral point (shown in Fig. 2), the neutral point being a point of contact of the cam follower on the first cam-surface segment when the pivot portion is in a neutral state.
With respect to claim 8, Jacobs discloses the pivot mechanism according to claim 6, wherein the cam surface includes a second cam-surface segment (portion of cam surface engaged when cam follower leaves recess (shown in Fig. 3)), the second cam-surface segment coming in contact with the cam follower when the pivot angle falls in a second angular range greater in the pivot angle than the first angular range, and the second cam-surface segment is configured such that when the second cam-surface segment comes in contact with the cam follower, a tangent line drawn at a point of contact with the cam follower on the second cam-surface is oriented orthogonal to a straight line connecting the point of contact and the pivot axis (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
367
418
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11, Jacobs discloses: A carrying vehicle (V, Fig. 1), comprising: a carrying vehicle body including a prime mover and a drive wheel; and the pivot mechanism recited in claim 1, the pivot mechanism attached to the carrying vehicle body.
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobs (US 4025085 A).
With respect to claim 7, Jacobs discloses the pivot mechanism according to claim 5 but is silent in teaching the cam surface is provided on the base portion, the urging member is attached to the pivot portion, the cam surface includes a first cam-surface segment, the first cam-surface segment coming in contact with the cam follower when the pivot angle falls in the first angular range, and the first cam-surface segment is shaped to be reduced in distance thereto from the pivot axis with increase in distance thereto from a neutral point, the neutral point set as a point of contact with the cam follower on the first cam-surface segment in the neutral state of the pivot portion.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Jacobs by reversing which vehicle is provided with the cam follower with the vehicle provided with the cam surface to arrive at the claimed invention. The modification would have been obvious because reversal of parts has been held to be an obvious modification (see MPEP 2144.04 VI. A.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 9-10 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 claims 2-3 and 9-10, the closest prior art made of record is Jacobs (US 4025085 A). Jacobs discloses: a pivot mechanism, comprising: a base portion (3); a pivot portion (1, Fig. 1) attached to the base portion in a pivotable manner; and a restoration mechanism configured to generate a restoring force (“the torque created by the novel stabilizer…”, Col. 7, LL. 14-21) the magnitude of which varies (see “an additional amount of torque…”, Col. 7, LL. 5-10) in accordance with a pivot angle of the pivot portion and that acts to restore the pivot portion to a neutral state (shown in Fig. 2) when the pivot angle of the pivot portion falls in a first angular range (angles with the cam follower still in the cam recess).
Regarding claim 2, Jacobs is silent in teaching a restoring force that is smaller in magnitude than the restoring force in a second angular range that is greater than the first angular range.
Regarding claim 9, Jacobs is silent in teaching a second cam-surface segment shaped to be constant in distance from the surface to the pivot axis, the second cam-surface coming into contact with the cam follower when the pivot angle falls in a second angular range.
Regarding claim 10, Jacobs is silent in teaching a third cam-surface segment coming in contact with the cam follower when the pivot angle falls in a third angular range between the first angular range and the second angular range, the first cam-surface segment is made in the shape of a circular arc recessed toward the pivot axis in a view along the pivot axis, and the third cam-surface segment is made in the shape of a circular arc bulged in a direction away from the pivot axis in the view along the pivot axis.
Suggestions to modify Jacobs to arrive at the inventions as claimed in claims 2-3 and 9-10 were not reasonably found in the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Russel (US 4726253 A) is considered to be particularly relevant to the applicant’s disclosure. Russel discloses a pivot mechanism comprising a cam (5, Fig. 1), a cam follower (2) and a biasing member (3) configured to bias the cam follower towards the cam to generate a restoring force.
Deitchman is also particularly relevant to the applicant’s disclosure. Deitchman discloses a pivot mechanism comprising a cam (9), a cam follower (11), and a biasing member (12) configured to bias the cam follower towards the cam to generate a restoring force. Deitchman further discloses a second angular range having a cam surface (convex portion of cam) shaped like a circle. However, since this circle is not coincident with the pivot axis, the circular cam surface is not shaped to be constant in distance from the surface to the pivot axis.
The other prior art made of record and not relied upon discloses towing systems and pivot restoring mechanisms in general.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew D Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-6087. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. (7:30 - 5:00 EST).
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, John Olszewski can be reached at (571) 272-2706. 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.
/MATTHEW D LEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3617
/DREW J BROWN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
