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.
Claim 3 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the sensor.” However, it is unclear if applicant is referring to the sensor of claim 1 or a previously recited sensor within claim 3. As such, claim 3 is deemed indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2 and 4 are allowed. Claims 3 is rejected but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the above stated 112 rejection. Regarding Claims 1-2 and 4, Kumagai et al. (US 2023/0358022 A1) teaches a construction machine comprising: a machine body (Fig 1); a front work implement (203) attached to the machine body (Fig 1); a first hydraulic pump (3) and a second hydraulic pump (2) mounted in the machine body (Fig 1); a first hydraulic actuator (211) that is driven by a delivered fluid of the first hydraulic pump (3) and drives the front work implement (203); a second hydraulic actuator (205 a) that is driven by a delivered fluid of the second hydraulic pump (2) and drives the front work implement (203); a third hydraulic actuator(204a-b) driven by the delivered fluid of the second hydraulic pump (2); a directional control valve (11) that controls a flow of a hydraulic fluid supplied from the second hydraulic pump (2) to the second hydraulic actuator (205a); solenoid valves (93) that generate a pilot pressure that drives the directional control valve (11) (Fig 2A-2B); an operation device (95) for operating the front work implement (Fig 2B).Kumagai further teaches a controller(94) that computes target flow rates for each actuator based on operation signal (see Fig 4) and controls the solenoid valves (93) according to operation signals (Fig 2B).
However, Kumagai is silent regarding the controller (94) controlling the first hydraulic pump, and the second hydraulic pump on a basis of a target face distance that is a distance between a specific point in the front work implement and a target construction face that is set in advance and an operation signal according to operation of the operation device, wherein the controller is configured to compute a supply flow rate of the hydraulic fluid supplied from the second hydraulic pump to the third hydraulic actuator, on a basis of an output of the sensor, compute an upper limit speed of the second hydraulic actuator on a basis of a flow rate difference between a maximum flow rate at which the second hydraulic pump is capable of delivering and the supply flow rate supplied to the third hydraulic actuator, compare a required speed of the second hydraulic actuator according to the operation signal with the upper limit speed, compute the required speed as a target speed of the second hydraulic actuator when the required speed is equal to or lower than the upper limit speed, and compute the upper limit speed as the target speed when the required speed exceeds the upper limit speed, add the supply flow rate supplied to the third hydraulic actuator to a flow rate according to the target speed of the second hydraulic actuator to compute a target flow rate of the second hydraulic pump, and control the solenoid valves on a basis of the target speed and control the second hydraulic pump on a basis of the target flow rate.
Similarly, Hijikata (US 2014/0283509 A1), Hiraku et al. (US 2016/0025113 A1) and Takahashi et al. (US 2018/0251960 A1) all teach similar devices that are pertinent to applicant’s claimed invention but they all remain silent regarding the above missing limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIY TEKA whose telephone number is (571)272-9804. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11-9 PM.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (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 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.
/ABIY TEKA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745