Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/927,810

VEHICLE WITH PENDULUM AXLES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 25, 2024
Examiner
MCFARLAND, KATHLEEN MAVOURNEEN
Art Unit
3635
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Oshkosh Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allow Rate
82 granted / 139 resolved
+7.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
180
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
51.5%
+11.5% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 139 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Acknowledgment is made of the amendment filed December 22, 2025. The application has been updated accordingly. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 22, 2025 has been entered. 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. Claims 1 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaiser (6,443,687) in view of Lombardo et al. (2016/0075543) hereinafter Lombardo. Kaiser discloses: Claim 1: A lift device, comprising: a lift base (Fig. 1; 1); a turntable (Fig. 1; 2) supported on and rotatably coupled to the lift base; a boom assembly (Fig. 1; 5) coupled to the turntable; a working tool (Fig. 1; 6) coupled to the boom assembly so that the boom assembly is configured to selectively raise and lower the working tool (Col. 2, Lines 11-15); and a plurality of tractive elements (Fig. 1; 8,15), each being coupled to the lift base by: a carrier arm (Fig. 2; 11); and a pendulum axle assembly (Fig. 2; 16), wherein each of the carrier arms is coupled to the lift base (Fig. 2; via 12) and rotatably coupled to a respective one of the pendulum axle assemblies (Fig. 1; via 17), wherein each of the pendulum axle assemblies includes a pendulum linkage (Fig. 2; 17) that is pivotally coupled (Col. 3, Lines 28-45) between a respective one of the carrier arms and a respective one of the plurality of tractive elements (Fig. 1; 8,15), and wherein each of the pendulum axle assemblies defines a steering axis (Fig. 2; at 17) that intersects and is centered relative to the respective one of the plurality of tractive elements, and wherein the each of the carrier arms is directly coupled to the respective one of the pendulum axle assemblies at the steering axis (Fig. 2; 11 and 16 are directly connected at the steering axis created by 17). While Kaiser fails to specifically disclose a platform coupled to the end of the boom assembly, Kaiser does disclose a working tool which the examiner asserts a platform is a working tool. However, Lombardo discloses a platform (Fig. 1; 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lift device of Kaiser to include the platform, as taught by Lombardo, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow a worker to safely be elevated by the boom assembly. Claim 8: Kaiser discloses the lift device of claim 1, wherein each of the pendulum axle assemblies is configured to selectively adjust a distance between the carrier arm and the respective one of the tractive elements along a vertical direction, so that the pendulum axle assemblies each move between a stowed position and an elevated position (Fig. 3; via 14 and 18, Col. 3, Lines 17-26). Claim 9: Kaiser discloses the lift device of claim 1, wherein the turntable is rotatably coupled to the lift base by a turntable bearing (Fig. 2; 2), wherein the turntable bearing is arranged below a pivot plane defined by an uppermost point on the carrier arms (Fig. 1; 2 is arranged below the uppermost point of 11). Claims 10 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaiser (6,443,687) in view of Lombardo et al. (2016/0075543) hereinafter Lombardo, and further in view of Davis (3,773,348). Claim 10: Kaiser discloses a lift device, comprising: a lift base (Fig. 1; 1); a turntable (Fig. 1; 2) supported on and rotatably coupled to the lift base; a boom assembly (Fig. 1; 5) coupled to the turntable; a working tool (Fig. 1; 6) coupled to the boom assembly so that the boom assembly is configured to selectively raise and lower the working tool (Col. 2, Lines 11-15); and a carrier arm (Fig. 2; 11) coupled to the lift base; a tractive element (Fig. 1; 8,15) coupled to the carrier arm; and a pendulum axle assembly (Fig. 2; 16) coupled between the carrier arm and the tractive element, the pendulum axle assembly includes a pendulum linkage (Fig. 2; 17) that is pivotally coupled between the carrier arm and the tractive element (Col. 3, Lines 28-45), and wherein the pendulum axle assembly defines a steering axis (Fig. 2; at 17) that is centered relative to the tractive element, and wherein the carrier arm is directly coupled to the pendulum axle assembly at the steering axis (Fig. 2; 11 and 16 are directly connected at the steering axis created by 17), but fails to disclose a platform and a dual-wheel assembly. While Kaiser fails to specifically disclose a platform coupled to the end of the boom assembly, Kaiser does disclose a working tool which the examiner asserts a platform is a working tool. However, Lombardo discloses a platform (Fig. 1; 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lift device of Kaiser to include the platform, as taught by Lombardo, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow a worker to safely be elevated by the boom assembly. Additionally, Davis discloses a dual wheel assembly (Fig. 2; 10,12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tractive elements of Kaiser to include the dual-wheel assemblies, as taught by Davis, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for more weight distribution to help balance the load placed on the wheels. Claim 14: Kaiser discloses the lift device of claim 10, wherein the pendulum axle assembly is configured to selectively adjust a distance between the carrier arm and the tractive element along a vertical direction, so that the pendulum axle assemblies each move between a stowed position and an elevated position (Fig. 3; via 14 and 18, Col. 3, Lines 17-26). Claim 15: Kaiser discloses the lift device of claim 10, wherein the turntable is rotatably coupled to the lift base by a turntable bearing (Fig. 2; 2), wherein the turntable bearing is arranged below a pivot plane defined by an uppermost point on the carrier arms (Fig. 1; 2 is arranged below the uppermost point of 11). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-7 and 11-13 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. Claims 2 and 11 are considered allowable due to the pendulum axle including a pendulum plate coupled to the carrier arm and an angled arm coupled between the pendulum plate and the pendulum linkage. Claims 3-7 and 12-13 are considered allowable due to their dependency from claims 2 and 11. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kathleen M. McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-9139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:00pm. 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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. /Kathleen M. McFarland/Examiner, Art Unit 3635 Kathleen M. McFarland Examiner Art Unit 3635 /BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 25, 2024
Application Filed
May 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 19, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 22, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600584
MOBILE ACCESS UNIT AND CAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599791
SELF-RETRACTING LIFELINE HOUSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12565908
Carabiner Divider and Fall Arrest System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12559953
SCAFFOLD STAIRWAY HAVING STEP HOLDERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12521578
LINE DISPENSING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+13.0%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 139 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month