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 .
Drawings
Figure 9 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(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.
Claim 8 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 8 Ln 2 states the limitation "a first regulator”. It is unclear if this first regulator is the same as or distinct from the first regulator stated in parent claim 2 Ln 2. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate. Claim 8 has a plurality of other similar issues such as: “a displacement” (Ln 2), “a second regulator” (Ln 3), “a displacement” (Ln 3), “control circuitry” (Ln 4)… These terms/limitations are all duplicates of claim 2. If claim 8 were instead to be interpreted as dependent upon claim 1, these issues would be resolved. However, claim 3, appears to be identical to that of claim 8. For examination, the limitations of claim 8 that appear to be duplicates of claim 2 have been interpreted as the same features/structures.
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 of this title, 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 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu; Juri et al. US 10655740 B2, hereinafter Shimizu, in view of Sadamori; Hiroyuki et al. US 20140366519 A1, hereinafter Sadamori. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (closed hydraulic circuits with flushing valves); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (providing power to the pump(s)). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 1, Shimizu discloses (Fig. 2, 5) a hydraulic system for a single-rod cylinder (1) including a head-side chamber (1a) and a rod-side chamber (1b), the hydraulic system comprising:
a first bi-directional pump (12) connected to the head-side chamber by a head-side line (212) and connected to the rod-side chamber by a rod-side line (213), the first bi-directional pump being a variable displacement pump (Col 5 Ln 19-31);
a second bi-directional pump (13) connected to the head-side line by a supply/discharge line (depicted line connecting (13-212)), the second bi-directional pump being a variable displacement pump (Col 5 Ln 19-31);
an engine (9) that drives the first bi-directional pump and the second bi-directional pump in a same direction;
a low-pressure selection valve (34) connected to the head-side line by a first discharge line (34g1) and connected to the rod-side line by a second discharge line (34g2), wherein
when a pressure difference between a pressure of the head-side chamber and a pressure of the rod-side chamber is less than a threshold (“Fpre”, Col 9 Ln 23-25), the low-pressure selection valve is in a neutral position in which the low-pressure selection valve blocks the first discharge line and the second discharge line (“neutral position”, Col 8 Ln 7-10, also depicted as the center position), and
when the pressure of the head-side chamber is higher than the pressure of the rod-side chamber by the threshold or greater, the low-pressure selection valve is switched to a rod-side discharge position in which the low-pressure selection valve allows the second discharge line to communicate with a relief line (229) on which a relief valve (20) is located (depicted when valve spool is shifted leftwards, enabling port (34g2-34i) connection), whereas
when the pressure of the rod-side chamber is higher than the pressure of the head-side chamber by the threshold or greater, the low-pressure selection valve is switched to a head- side discharge position in which the low-pressure selection valve allows the first discharge line to communicate with the relief line (depicted when valve spool is shifted rightwards, enabling port (34g1-34i) connection); and
a position detector (64a, 64b) that detects whether a position of the low-pressure selection valve is the neutral position, the rod-side discharge position, or the head-side discharge position (detects via pressure sensors detecting pressures in the head/rod side lines, Col 18 Ln 43-47).
Shimizu fails to explicitly state that an electric motor drives the first bi-directional pump and the second bi-directional pump in a same direction. Instead, Shimizu discloses an engine (9) drives the first bi-directional pump and the second bi-directional pump in a same direction.
Sadamori discloses (Fig. 1) a hydraulic system for a single-rod cylinder (11) including a head-side chamber (24) and a rod-side chamber (25), the hydraulic system comprising:
a first bi-directional pump (13) connected to a head-side chamber by a head-side line (17) and connected to a rod-side chamber by a rod-side line (18), the first bi-directional pump being a variable displacement pump (Col 5 Ln 19-31);
a second bi-directional pump (13) connected to the head-side line by a supply/discharge line (depicted line connecting (13-212));
an electric motor (12) that drives the first bi-directional pump.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element (electric motor) for another (engine), and the results of the substitution (rotationally driving the pump(s)) would have been predictable. Because both Shimizu and Sadamori teach power sources for pumps, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute electric motor for the engine to achieve the predictable result of rotationally driving the pump(s).
Regarding claim 7, Shimizu discloses (Fig. 2, 5) further comprising:
a head-side relief valve (37a) located on a head-side relief line that is branched off from the head-side line (212);
a first check valve (40a) located on a first bypass line that bypasses the head-side relief valve;
a rod-side relief valve (37b) located on a rod-side relief line that is branched off from the rod-side line (213);
and a second check valve (40b) located on a second bypass line that bypasses the rod-side relief valve.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu in view of Sadamori, in further view of Tikkanen; Seppo US 20090064676 A1, hereinafter Tikkanen. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (closed hydraulic circuits with flushing valves); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (holding the actuator in position). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 5, Shimizu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1 except fails to explicitly state that the hydraulic system further comprising:
a first lock valve located on the head-side line, the first lock valve being an on-off valve; and
a second lock valve located on the rod-side line, the second lock valve being an on-off valve.
Tikkanen discloses (Fig. 2) a hydraulic system for a single-rod cylinder (2) including a head-side chamber (7) and a rod-side chamber (8), the hydraulic system comprising:
a first bi-directional pump (11) connected to the head-side chamber by a head-side line (9) and connected to the rod-side chamber by a rod-side line (10), the first bi-directional pump being a variable displacement pump [0021];
a second bi-directional pump (12) connected to the head-side line by a supply/discharge line (9b), the second bi-directional pump being a variable displacement pump [0021];
a power source (19) that drives the first bi-directional pump and the second bi-directional pump in a same direction [0024];
a low-pressure selection valve (45) connected to the head-side line by a first discharge line (46) and connected to the rod-side line by a second discharge line (47);
a first lock valve (55) located on the head-side line, the first lock valve being an on-off valve [0039-0040]; and
a second lock valve (56) located on the rod-side line, the second lock valve being an on-off valve [0039-0040].
Tikkanen further discloses [0045] providing the first/second lock valves enables the system “to clamp hydraulically the working piston 3 in any position and thus to prevent any undesired movement”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify Shimizu, by providing the first/second lock valves, as taught by Tikkanen, for the purpose of enabling the system “to clamp hydraulically the working piston 3 in any position and thus to prevent any undesired movement”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 6 and 8 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, Shimizu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1. Shimizu further discloses (Fig. 2, 5) the hydraulic system further comprising:
a first regulator (12a) that changes a displacement of the first bi-directional pump (Col 13 Ln 56-59);
a second regulator (13a) that changes a displacement of the second bi-directional pump (Col 13 Ln 56-59); and
control circuitry (57) that controls the electric motor (as modified by Sadamori [0037]), the first regulator, and the second regulator (Col 13 Ln 56-59).
Shimizu fails to explicitly state that at a time of extending the single-rod cylinder, the control circuitry controls the first regulator and the second regulator such that:
when the position of the low-pressure selection valve, which is detected by the position detector, is the neutral position, the displacement of the first bi-directional pump is a first reference displacement and the displacement of the second bi-directional pump is a second reference displacement;
when the position of the low-pressure selection valve, which is detected by the position detector, is the rod-side discharge position, the displacement of the first bi- directional pump is less than the first reference displacement by a first predetermined amount and the displacement of the second bi-directional pump is greater than the second reference displacement by the first predetermined amount; and
when the position of the low-pressure selection valve, which is detected by the position detector, is the head-side discharge position, the displacement of the first bi- directional pump is the first reference displacement and the displacement of the second bi- directional pump is greater than the second reference displacement by a second predetermined amount.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed relationship between the position of the low-pressure selection valve and the displacements of the first and second bi-directional pumps. Although Shimizu discloses a low-pressure selection valve and controlling the displacements of the first and second bi-directional pumps, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Shimizu to incorporate the details of the claimed relationship between the position of the low-pressure selection valve and the displacements of the first and second bi-directional pumps as stated above, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Claims 4 and 8 depend from claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Shimizu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1. Shimizu further discloses (Fig. 2, 5) the hydraulic system further comprising:
a first regulator (12a) that changes a displacement of the first bi-directional pump (Col 13 Ln 56-59);
a second regulator (13a) that changes a displacement of the second bi-directional pump (Col 13 Ln 56-59); and
control circuitry (57) that controls the electric motor (as modified by Sadamori [0037]), the first regulator, and the second regulator (Col 13 Ln 56-59).
Shimizu fails to explicitly state that at a time of retracting the single-rod cylinder, the control circuitry controls the first regulator and the second regulator such that:
when the position of the low-pressure selection valve, which is detected by the position detector, is the neutral position, the displacement of the first bi-directional pump is a first reference displacement and the displacement of the second bi-directional pump is a second reference displacement;
when the position of the low-pressure selection valve, which is detected by the position detector, is the head-side discharge position, the displacement of the first bi- directional pump is the first reference displacement and the displacement of the second bi- directional pump is less than the second reference displacement by a third predetermined amount; and
when the position of the low-pressure selection valve, which is detected by the position detector, is the rod-side discharge position, the displacement of the first bi- directional pump is greater than the first reference displacement by a fourth predetermined amount and the displacement of the second bi-directional pump is less than the second reference displacement by the fourth predetermined amount.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed relationship between the position of the low-pressure selection valve and the displacements of the first and second bi-directional pumps. Although Shimizu discloses a low-pressure selection valve and controlling the displacements of the first and second bi-directional pumps, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Shimizu to incorporate the details of the claimed relationship between the position of the low-pressure selection valve and the displacements of the first and second bi-directional pumps as stated above, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 6, Shimizu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1. Shimizu further discloses (Fig. 2, 5) the pressure of the head-side chamber (1a) is led to the low-pressure selection valve (34) through a first pilot line (depicted line connected to port (34g1)), and the pressure of the rod-side chamber (1b) is led to the low-pressure selection valve through a second pilot line (depicted line connected to port (34g2)).
Shimizu fails to explicitly state that the hydraulic system further comprises: a first on-off valve located on the first pilot line; and a second on-off valve located on the second pilot line.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed first and second on-off valves. Although Shimizu discloses first and second pilot lines, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Shimizu to incorporate the details of the claimed first on-off valve located on the first pilot line; and second on-off valve located on the second pilot line, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Relevant Art
The following is a listing of relevant art:
US 20190072178 A1, US 6263670 B1, US 20080072589 A1, US 20160153556 A1, US 20060070377 A1, US 2927429 A, US 10982761 B2, US 4520626 A, US 3158167 A, US 20100293937 A1, US 20220056667 A1, US 20180251960 A1, US 20070204608 A1 disclose hydraulic systems with flushing valves similar to the claimed invention.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW WIBLIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9836. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NATHANIEL WIEHE can be reached on 571-272-8648. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW WIBLIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights