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 11-15 are 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 15 recites the limitation "the one or more alignment sensors" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claim(s) 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hsu et al (US20200332949).
Referring to claim 11. Hsu discloses an offroad utility vehicle (100) comprising: a carrier deck (load platform supported on a chassis) (See Sect. 005, 0026); a demountable platform (200) that is movable between a mounted position in which the demountable platform is carried by the carrier deck and a demounted position in which the demountable platform is deployed onto the ground (Sect. 0005, 0047); a drop-leg mechanism connected to the demountable platform, wherein the demountable platform comprises a plurality of legs (210, 220) that are movable between a raised position in which the legs are raised above the ground and a lowered position in which the legs are lowered onto the ground (See Sect. 0005, 0034).
Referring to claim 12. Hsu further discloses a level controller (274) for controlling orientation of a platform (200) once deployed (Sect. 0040) and a sensor input (276) receiving input from sensors (263) that determine the orientation of the platform. The level controller (274) may then control the actuators in the legs (210, 220) to bring the platform to the desired orientation (See Sect. 0049). Thus teaching, the sensors/accelerometer determines inclination angle and provides the data to the level controller.
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, 3, 5, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roessel (DE19926899) in view of Takashi (EP0226902).
Referring to claim 1. Roessel discloses a “Transhipment System With Containers Definable on a Transport Vehicle or the Like”. See Figs. 1-12 and respective portions of the specification. Roessel further discloses a transport vehicle comprising: a carrier deck (20); a demountable platform (30, roll-off container) that is movable between a mounted position in which the demountable platform is carried by the carrier deck and a demounted position in which the demountable platform is deployed onto the ground (See Sect. 0030); and a hook and lift mechanism (42, 43) for moving the demountable platform between the mounted and demounted positions, wherein the hook and lift mechanism comprises a hook (43) for hooking onto the demountable platform, wherein the hook and lift mechanism comprises a power lift mechanism (44, 46) that includes an actuator (46) and a rotatable frame comprising a first beam (42) and a second beam (41), the first beam supporting the hook. It should be noted that Roessel discloses rotation of the loading arm about a fixed pivot axis but not that the rotatable channel in which the base arm moves to achieved combined sliding and rotation motion. Roessel does not disclose wherein the transport vehicle is offroad utility vehicle or wherein the second beam is configured to move inside a rotatable channel for both sliding and rotating the demountable platform into an inclined posture relative to the carrier deck. Takashi discloses a “Cargo Vehicle”. See Figs. 1-23 and respective portions of the specification. Takashi further discloses a cargo vehicle configured for loading and unloading a detachable container, in which a lift arm (5) driven by a hydraulic cylinder (14) engages the container via a support (10) at the tip of the forked lift arm and the further discloses the sliding-rotating mechanism, more specifically, the support shaft (9) being in the rotatable sliding contact by the support during the forward and rearward rotation of the lift arm, thus a sliding-pivotal engagement in which the container member slides and pivotally rotates within the receiving element of the lift arm producing translational and rotational motion on the container (See Sect. 0018). Takashi further discloses that this mechanism results in the container being placed in an inclined posture (See Sect. 0065). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hook-lift loading arm mechanism of Roessel to incorporate the combined sliding-rotating engagement mechanism of Takashi, configuring the base arm (second beam) to move within the rotatable channel, in order to achieve combined translational and rotational motion of the demountable platform into an inclined posture during loading and unloading, as this would provide a more stable and controllable container transfer structure, making it easier to move heavy containers between the vehicle and ground and further it would have been obvious to implement the combined system, on an offroad vehicle, as it would perform the same functionality independent of a vehicles terrain but adapting for a offroad vehicle, will allow for greater versatility.
Referring to claim 3. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel discloses wherein the demountable platform comprise a platform roller at a rear end of the demountable platform. More specifically, Roessel discloses that the demountable platform (roll-off container) is provided with rollers near the bottom and at the rear (See Sect. 0010) and furthermore that the rear roller (32) is flush with the lower edge of the longitudinal member (52) (See Sect. 0035).
Referring to claim 5. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel discloses an angular loading arm (40) comprising a base arm (41) connected directly to the piston/cylinder actuator (46) (first linkage connected to the actuator) and a free angular arm (42) that is angled relative to the base arm (41) (See Sect. 0030), thus the angular arm structure, pivoting about pivot axis (38), causes the container to both translate and rotate during the loading/unloading operation. Takashi disclose concurrent sliding and rotating through the combined operation of lift arm (5) and auxiliary arm (6), both driven by hydraulic cylinders (14, 15) (See Sect. 0020). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Roessel’s two-beam angular arm structure with Takashi’s teaching of concurrent two arm operation, so that a concurrent slide and rotate function, as it would produce a more stable and reliable container transfer structure, making it easier to have heavy containers moved between a vehicle and the ground.
Referring to claim 10. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel discloses wherein the first beam is orthogonal to the second beam. More specifically, Roessel discloses a loading arm (40) that is angular in longitudinal section with a base arm and a free angular arm (See Sect. 0030, Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 2, 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roessel (DE19926899) in view of Takashi (EP0226902) and in further view of Josef (EP0630779).
Referring to claim 2. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel does not disclose a vehicle mounted roller extending rearwardly behind the carrier deck. Josef discloses a “Utility Vehicle For Loading And Unloading Containers and Transfer System”. See Figs. 1-21 and respective portions of the specification. Josef further discloses a commercial vehicle for picking up and setting down containers in which a rear loading ramp (4) is articulated to the vehicle chassis and extends rearwardly from the carrier deck (1), specifically disclosing rollers at the rearmost end of the vehicle mounted element (See Sect. 0005). Further, Josef discloses wherein roller elements are at the rear of the vehicle (See Sect. 0036). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a vehicle mounted roller at the rear end of the carrier deck as taught by Josef, in order to provide a smooth rolling transition point at the rear edge of the vehicle over which the demountable platform passes during loading and unloading, as this would reduce friction and wear at the highest point of load contact during container transfer.
Referring to claim 4. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel discloses wherein the demountable platform comprises a platform roller at a rear end of the demountable platform (See Sect. 0010, 0035, claim rejection 3), while the vehicle mounted roller limitation is disclosed by Josef (See Sects. 0005, 0036, claim 2 rejection). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Takashi and Josef in order to provide a smooth rolling transition point at the rear edge of the vehicle over which the demountable platform passes during loading and unloading, as this would reduce friction and wear at the highest point of load contact during container transfer.
Claim(s) 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roessel (DE19926899) in view of Takashi (EP0226902) and in further view of Kovacs (WO9712768).
Referring to claim 6. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel does not disclose a main vehicle unit having at least four inflatable tires; and a rear wagon coupled to the main vehicle unit, wherein the rear wagon comprises the carrier deck and wherein the rear wagon also has at least four inflatable tires, the inflatable tires of the main vehicle and the rear wagon vehicle being of sufficient volume to enable the offroad utility vehicle to float on water. Kovacs discloses a “Vehicle, Especially Amphibious Vehicle”. See Figs. 1-16 and respective portions of the specification. Kovacs further discloses an amphibious vehicle in which wheel volume is sized to provide flotation and likewise Kovacs discloses a vehicle (truck, 24) comprising a main vehicle unit (prime mover, 25) and a rear wagon (trailer, 26) hinged to the main vehicle unit, with both the main vehicle unit and rear wagon provided with inflatable supporting units (See detailed description, Figs. 13-14). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kovacs amphibious flotation design with sizing the inflatable tires of both the main vehicle unit and the rear wagon to achieve a mass/volume ration sufficient for flotation to the articulated hook lift transport vehicle of Roessel, in order to enable deployment of the cargo platform in swampy, marshy, or unusual terrain where a purely land based vehicle could not operate.
Claim(s) 7, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roessel (DE19926899) in view of Takashi (EP0226902) and in further view of Hsu et al (US20200332949).
Referring to claim 7. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel doesn’t disclose a platform self-leveling controller for controlling self-leveling of the demountable platform and a platform inclination sensor for sensing an angle of inclination of the demountable platform and for providing the inclination to the platform self-leveling controller. Hsu et al (herein “Hsu”) discloses a “Utility Vehicle With Deployable Platform”. See Figs. 1-8 and respective portions of the specification. Hsu further discloses a level controller (274) for controlling orientation of a platform (200) once deployed (Sect. 0040) and a sensor input (276) receiving input from sensors (263) that determine the orientation of the platform. The level controller (274) may then control the actuators in the legs (210, 220) to bring the platform to the desired orientation (See Sect. 0049). Thus teaching, the sensors/accelerometer determines inclination angle and provides the data to the level controller. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the self-leveling controller and inclination sensor of Hsu into the demountable platform of Roessel in order to maintain the platform in a level orientation when deployed on the uneven offroad terrain for which the vehicle is designed.
Referring to claim 9. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel does not disclose an environment sensing cameras to sense the ground onto which the platform is to be deployed. Hsu discloses an environment sensing camera (163) as part of the vehicle sensor system (Sect. 0031). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an environment sensing camera as taught by Hsu into the vehicle of Roessel in order to assess ground conditions at the deployment site before lowering the demountable platform, so that it could be ensured that the location for where the platform was going to be deployed was safe and would provide stability when containers were being moved.
Claim(s) 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roessel (DE19926899) in view of Takashi (EP0226902) and in further view of Chen et al (20200239000).
Referring to claim 8. Roessel in view of Takashi disclose the combination as set forth above as applied to claim 1. Roessel doesn’t disclose a GNSS receiver for generating location coordinates of the demountable platform and a satellite and/or cellular transceiver for transmitting the location coordinates of the demountable platform. Chen discloses a “System and Method For Determining Roadway Bank Angle”. See Figs. 1-9 and respective portions of the specification. Chen further discloses a vehicle mounted GNSS and cellular communication system in which a GNSS receiver (48) generates geographic location coordinates and a cellular transceiver transmits those coordinates to a remote facility (See Sect. 0049-0050). Moreover, Chen teaches transmission of location coordinates via a cellular transceiver, wherein the coordinates can be sent from a wireless communications device (30) (See Sect. 0041, 0048-0050). Additionally, Chen discloses this system on a vehicle. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to install a GNSS receiver and cellular transceiver as taught by Chen on the demountable platform of Roessel in order to generate and transmit the location coordinates of the platform after it has been deployed and left at a remote site, so that the deployable platform could be located in varying terrain.
Claim(s) 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu et al (US20200332949) in view of Chen et al (20200239000).
Referring to claim 13. Hsu discloses device as described above as applied to claim 11. Hsu does not disclose a GNSS receiver for generating location coordinates of the demountable platform and a satellite and/or cellular transceiver for transmitting the location coordinates of the demountable platform. Chen discloses a vehicle mounted GNSS and cellular communication system in which a GNSS receiver (48) generates geographic location coordinates and a cellular transceiver transmits those coordinates to a remote facility (See Sect. 0049-0050). Moreover, Chen teaches transmission of location coordinates via a cellular transceiver, wherein the coordinates can be sent from a wireless communications device (30) (See Sect. 0041, 0048-0050). Additionally, Chen discloses this system on a vehicle. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to install a GNSS receiver and cellular transceiver as taught by Chen on the demountable platform of Roessel in order to generate and transmit the location coordinates of the platform after it has been deployed and left at a remote site, so that the deployable platform could be located in varying terrain.
Claim(s) 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu et al (US20200332949) in view of Pedersen (CN103108776).
Referring to claims 14-15. Hsu discloses device as described above as applied to claim 11. Hsu discloses vehicle sensors including cameras and other sensor types (Sect. 0031) but Hsu does not disclose one or more alignment sensors to detect or sense the legs of the demountable platform or wherein the demountable platform comprises detectable elements to facilitate sensing by the one or more alignment sensors. Pedersen discloses a “System For Handling Cargo”. See Figs. 1-10 and respective portions of the specification. Pedersen further discloses a cargo handling system in which a mobile trolley uses sensors to detect position indicators on the cargo platform to enable accurate positioning and alignment. More specifically, Pedersen disclose a “trolley that includes a plurality of sensors suitable for reading indicia on the deck” and that “sensors are positioned on the deck can read the marks placed on the trolley” (See deck sensors section). Further, Pedersen discloses detectable elements on the cargo platform that facilitate sensing by alignment sensors and more specifically, marking that may be mechanical, optical or magnetic that are detectable elements on the platform structure that the sensors read to enable alignment. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate alignment sensors as taught by Pedersen into the vehicle of Hsu to detect the legs of the demountable platform, guide the vehicle back into alignment for platform retrieval, and detectable elements on the platform to aid and help with alignment.
Claim(s) 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu et al (US20200332949) in view of Kovacs (WO9712768).
Referring to claims 16-17. Hsu discloses device as described above as applied to claim 11. Hsu does not disclose a main vehicle unit having at least four inflatable tires or a rear wagon that has four inflatable tires, with the tires being sufficient volume to enable the vehicle to float on water, wherein the demountable platform can be used as a flotation device. Kovacs discloses a “Vehicle, Especially Amphibious Vehicle”. See Figs. 1-16 and respective portions of the specification. Kovacs further discloses an amphibious vehicle in which wheel volume is sized to provide flotation and likewise Kovacs discloses a vehicle (truck, 24) comprising a main vehicle unit (prime mover, 25) and a rear wagon (trailer, 26) hinged to the main vehicle unit, with both the main vehicle unit and rear wagon provided with inflatable supporting units (See detailed description, Figs. 13-14). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kovacs amphibious flotation design with sizing the inflatable tires of both the main vehicle unit and the rear wagon to achieve a mass/volume ration sufficient for flotation to the articulated hook lift transport vehicle of Hsu, in order to enable deployment of the cargo platform in swampy, marshy, or unusual terrain where a purely land based vehicle could not operate or reach if water access was needed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRELL HOWARD MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)272-5929. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM 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, 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.
/TERRELL H MATTHEWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights