CTNF 18/925,114 CTNF 82920 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 Bewley et al. (9,670,649) in view of Debrunner et al. (9,229,108). Regarding claims 1, 9 and 17, Bewley et al. discloses a system and method for payload estimation in a dragline bucket of a dragline machine (column 5 lines 30-38), wherein the dragline machine comprises a frame and a dragline bucket (3a) and the system comprising: a sensing module (27) disposed on the dragline bucket (3a), wherein the sensing module is configured to generate a plurality of signals indicative of a distance value between the sensing module and payload in the dragline bucket; and (column 9 line 58 – column 10 line 2) a controller (column 7 lines 31-35) including at least one memory and at least one processor communicably coupled with the at least one memory and the sensing module, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive, from the sensing module, the plurality of signals indicative of the distance value between the sensing module and the payload in the dragline bucket (column 9 line 58 – column 10 line 11); estimate a volume of the payload in the dragline bucket when the dragline bucket is underwater, based on the plurality of signals received from the sensing module (column 9 line 58 – column 10 line 11); and generate an output signal indicative of the estimated volume of the payload in the dragline bucket (column 9 line 58 – column 10 line 11) While Bewley et al. discloses the invention as described above, it fails to disclose underwater functionality. Like Bewley, Debrunner discloses a system for 3d mapping using a laser. Unlike Bewley, Debrunner discloses that the system can be used for mapping underwater structures. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a laser that functions underwater as taught by Debrunner to map the bucket of Bewley underwater as it would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)) since dragline buckets are commonly used underwater and it would be desirable to have a system that functions in all of the environments that the device is commonly used. Regarding claims 2, 10 and 18, the combination discloses an output module communicably coupled with the at least one processor wherein the output module is configured to receive the output signal from the at least one processor and generate a notification t0 indicate the estimated volume of the payload in the dragline bucket ((column 9 line 58 – column 10 line 2; column 10 lines 23-31) (figures 17-18). Regarding claims 3, 11 and 19, the combination disclose that the output module is a display device (Figures 17-18) and includes one of a two dimensional image, a three dimensional image, an absolute value or percentage value of the estimated volume of the payload in the dragline bucket (column 13 line 61 through column 14 line 19). Regarding claim 4, 12 and 20, the combination disclose that the processor is configured to compare the estimated volume of the payload in the bucket with a predetermined threshold volume of the payload, generate the output signal if the estimated volume in the dragline bucket is lesser than the predetermined threshold volume and transmit to the output module the output signal (column 13 lines 34-40; column 9 line 58 – column 10 line 11). Regarding claims 5 and 13, the output module is configured to receive the output signal from the at least one processor and generate an alert to indicate that the estimated volume of the payload in the bucket is lesser than the predetermined threshold volume of the payload (column 9 line 58 – column 10 line 11). Regarding claims 6 and 14, the sensing module includes a sonar sensor, acoustic sensor, a camera, a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor and/or a radio detection and ranging (RADAR) sensor (column 2 lines 44-48). Regarding claims 7 and 15, the combination discloses that the sensing module can include a wireless connection (which would inherently include a transmitter and receiver)(column 4 lines 19-20). Regarding claims 8 and 16, the combination discloses that the sensing module (27) is disposed on an arch of the dragline bucket (Figure 19). Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bewley et al. (Real-Time Volume Estimation of a Dragline Payload) discloses using a distance sensor for volume estimation of a dragline bucket but doesn’t appear to disclose the sensing module on the bucket or underwater operations . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jamie L McGowan whose telephone number is (571)272-5064. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00-5:00 CST. 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 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. /JAMIE L MCGOWAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 Application/Control Number: 18/925,114 Page 2 Art Unit: 3671 Application/Control Number: 18/925,114 Page 3 Art Unit: 3671 Application/Control Number: 18/925,114 Page 4 Art Unit: 3671 Application/Control Number: 18/925,114 Page 5 Art Unit: 3671
Prosecution Insights