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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Teranishi (WO 2020235450 A1).
Regarding claim 1, the crane of Teranishi teaches a work machine, comprising:
a swivel body (120) configured to be pivotable (Fig 5; Pg 3, body 5 “The upper swivel body 12, the boom 21, the hook 30, the undulating rope 31 and the hanging rope 32 constitute a swivel portion 120 that swivels integrally.”);
a work attachment (30) provided with a boom (21) mounted to the swivel body (Fig 1) and configured so as to be raised and lowered (Pg 3, body 11 “The first winch device 161 changes the elevation angle of the boom 21 by winding or feeding out the undulating rope 31. That is, the boom 21 is driven by the first winch device 161 and the undulating rope 31 so that the elevation angle can be changed.”);
a control device (6) configured to perform automatic control of the swivel body (Pg 8, body 5; Pg 8 body 8); and
a braking device (440) capable of switching between a braking state in which operation of the swivel body is restricted and a non-braking state in which the operation is not restricted (Pg 4, last body), wherein the control device starts or sets the automatic control in a state capable of being started upon switching of the braking device from the braking state to the non-braking state (Pg 12, Process S111).
Regarding claim 2, Teranishi teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Teranishi further teaches the control device accepts an input related to the automatic control in accordance with the braking device being in the braking state (Pg 12, Process S111).
Regarding claim 3, Teranishi teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Teranishi further teaches the braking device is a turn brake (440) configured to restrict turning of the swivel body (Pg 4, last 2 bodies).
Regarding claim 4, Teranishi teaches the limitations of claim 3 as described above, Teranishi further teaches a slewing gear configured to turn the swivel body (Fig 5);
a boom hoisting winch (161) configured to raise and lower the boom (Pg 3, body 10-11); and
a main winch (162) configured to wind up a main rope (32) for suspending a hook (30) from a tip of the work attachment (Fig 1; Pg 3, body 10).
Claims 1 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 20110109674 A (hereinafter “KR ‘674”).
Regarding claim 1, The automatically operated crane of KR ‘674 teaches a work machine (Abstract; Fig 1), comprising: a swivel body configured to be pivotable (Fig 1; Pg 3 Paragraph 1, ln 1-2); a work attachment provided with a boom mounted to the swivel body and configured so as to be raised and lowered (Pg 2, BACKGROUND-ART, Paragraph 1); a control device (Control Panel 300) configured to perform automatic control of the swivel body (Pg 1, Abstract, Paragraph 2, ln 2); and a braking device capable of switching between a braking state in which operation of the swivel body is restricted and a non-braking state in which the operation is not restricted (Pg 3, Paragraph 3, ln 5-7; Pg 3, Paragraph 1, ln 7-10), wherein the control device starts or sets the automatic control in a state capable of being started upon switching of the braking device from the braking state to the non-braking state (Pg 3, Paragraph 3, ln 5-7). A braking device is required to perform the stopping actions of the crane control device.
Regarding claim 6, KR ‘674 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, KR ‘674 further the control device interrupts the automatic control upon switching of the braking device from the non-braking state to the braking state after start of the automatic control (Pg 3, Paragraph 1, ln 7-10).
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 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20110109674 A (hereinafter “KR ‘674”) in view of Teranishi (WO 2020235450 A1).
Regarding claim 3, KR ‘674 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, KR ‘674 is silent on the details of a turn brake. However, the braking device of Teranishi teaches the braking device is a turn brake (440) configured to restrict turning of the swivel body (Pg 4, last 2 paragraphs). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the braking system of KR ‘674 with a turn brake to actively stop the rotation of the swivel body faster than drivetrain braking.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 3 as described above, KR ‘674 further teaches a slewing gear configured to turn the swivel body (Fig 1); and a main winch configured to wind up a main rope for suspending a hook from a tip of the work attachment (Pg 2, BACKGROUND-ART, body 1). Teranishi teaches a boom hoisting winch (161) configured to raise and lower the boom (Pg 3, body 10-11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the crane of KR ‘674 with the boom hoisting winch of Teranishi to change the elevation angle of the boom (Pg 3, body 11).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 4 as described above, KR ‘674 further teaches the automatic control further includes control of the slewing gear and control of at least one of the boom hoisting winch or the main winch (Pg 3, Paragraph 3, ln 1-4).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20210188602 A1 discloses automatic control of a slewing gear.
US 20220282453 A1 discloses a brake for a slewing motor that invalidates operations performed on the operation devices.
CN 106946159 A discloses automatic control of a crane with a “stop” command for controlling the crane.
CN 105523479 A discloses automatic control of a crane with an “emergency brake button” that powers off the automatic control.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RALPH D WILKINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6183. The examiner can normally be reached 8 - 4, M-Fr.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
/RALPH D WILKINSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights