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
1. 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 –
2. (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.
3. (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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 9-11, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being (a)(1), (a)(2) as being anticipated by Tetsuya et al (EP3498656A1).
5. Regarding Claim 1, Tetsuya et al discloses a work machine comprising a cable(2) winch, by means of which a cable(2) can be wound up for lifting a load(4) and unwound for lowering the load(4), a motor(8), by means of which the cable winch can be driven, and a controller, by means of which the motor(8) can be controlled, wherein the motor comprises a braking device(6) for generating a braking torque counteracting an externally generated torque, wherein when the load(4) is lowered as a function of a predetermined target braking torque and a braking torque that can be provided by the motor(8), the controller(12) is configured to control the braking device(6) and to control the motor(8) in such a way that the load(4) is lowered at a predetermined speed. See Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 12 lines 22-29 “A Boom(1) supported by the crane main body so as to be capable of being derricked and the electric winch apparatus. The boom(1) has a distal end from which a hook(3) is suspended through a wire rope(2). The hook(3) is connected to a front end of the wire rope(2) and the suspended load(4) is hooked on the hook(3) to be suspended, Col 4 paragraph 18 lines 30-32 “The inverter(9) controls the motion of the electric motor(8) according to a control signal input from the controller(12), see Col 12, paragraph 58.
6. Regarding Claim 3, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
7. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine wherein the controller is configured to determine the target braking torque at least on the basis of a detected current load, a current reeving of the cable, a desired lowering speed of the load and/or a desired rotational speed and/or to determine the braking torque that can be provided by the motor at least on the basis of a detected current rotational speed of the motor, See Fig1 and Fig 2, Col 7 paragraph 35 “The speed control section(121) generates such a torque command as to make a deviation be 0 between the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) input from the speed calculation section(123) and the speed command value input from the winch control section(124). In the present embodiment, a negative sign and a positive sign are given to a rotational speed of electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating the winch drum(5) in the lowering direction and a rotational speed of the electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating winch drum(5) in the lifting direction, respectively, the signs making it possible to judge whether the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) is a speed in the lifting direction or the a speed in the lowering direction”, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
8. Regarding Claim 4, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
9. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine wherein the controller is configured to control a rotational speed to a target rotational speed when the load is lowered, in order to provide the target braking torque for the cable winch, See Fig1 and Fig 2, paragraph 34-67 for configurations of controller, Col 4 paragraph 19 lines 24-28 “The speed reducer(7) transmits rotational force of the rotational shaft(8a) to the rotating shaft (5a) of the winch drum(5) while reducing a rotational speed of the rotating shaft(8a) of the electric motor(8) at a predetermined reduction ration”, Col 7 paragraph 35 “The speed control section(121) generates such a torque command as to make a deviation be 0 between the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) input from the speed calculation section(123) and the speed command value input from the winch control section(124). In the present embodiment, a negative sign and a positive sign are given to a rotational speed of electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating the winch drum(5) in the lowering direction and a rotational speed of the electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating winch drum(5) in the lifting direction, respectively, the signs making it possible to judge whether the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) is a speed in the lifting direction or the a speed in the lowering direction”, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
11. Regarding Claim 9, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
12. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine wherein the cable winch is connected to the motor via a transfer case, see Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 14 lines 45-47 “The winch drum(5) is rotated by a torque applied from the electric motor(8). The winch drum(8) has a rotating shaft(5a)
13. Regarding Claim 10, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
14. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine further comprising a detection device(18) connected to the controller for detecting a current rotational speed and/or a current load and/or a current torque. see Fig 1 and 2, Col 7 paragraph 36 lines 1-7 “The current control section(122) determines a target current value based on a torque command input from the speed control section(121) and generates a control signal for making a deviation be 0 between the determined target current value and current value measured by the ammeter(18), inputting the control signal to the inverter(9).
15. Regarding Claim 11, Tetsuya et al discloses a method for lowering a load(4) by means of a work machine and all the limitations of claim 1, wherein the controller(12) controls the motor(8) by controlling the braking device(6) in dependence on a desired braking torque and a braking torque providable by the motor(8), in such a way that the load(4) is lowered at the predetermined constant speed, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-46 “The winch control section(124) inputs the break control signal for bringing the brake(6) into the braking state, to the brake(6), when the operation lever(13a) is at the neutral position, that is when the operation amount of the operation lever(13a) indicated by the signal input from the operation lever device(13) is 0. The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal from bringing the brake(6) into releasing state”, Col 8 paragraph 40, Col 7 paragraph 35 “The speed control section(121) generates such a torque command as to make a deviation be 0 between the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) input from the speed calculation section(123) and the speed command value input from the winch control section(124)
25.
16. Regarding Claim 15, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
17. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine wherein the work machine is a crane, see Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 12 line 23-23 “The crane includes a crane body”.
18. Regarding Claim 16, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
19. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine wherein the predetermined speed is a constant speed, Col 12, paragraph 57 lines 38-42 “Before the start of the lowering operation that is before a time t0, the suspended load(4) is under a stopped state. All this time, the operation lever(13a) is at the neutral position and the brake(6) is under the braking state, thus the speed of the suspended load(4) being 0.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
20. 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.
21. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
22. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al
23. Regarding Claim 2, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
24. Tetsuya discloses work machine wherein the motor is an electric motor, See Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 13 lines 32-33 “The electric winch apparatus includes a winch drum(5), a brake(6), a speed reducer(7), an electric motor(8) and inverter(9), a power source(10), a regenerative resistor(11). 25.
25. Tetsuya et al does not disclose that the motor is an internal combustion engine.
26. Internal combustion engines with fuel injection systems are well known alternatives to motors for providing a motive force.
27. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) electric motor, with an internal combustion engine, as electric motors and internal combustion engines are alternative power sources in driving such work machine and their substitution would have yielded similar function. The substitution of one known element for another to get a predictable result represents a case-law for known substitutions under KSR. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398(2007)
28. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al(EP3498656)
29. Regarding Claim 5, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 3.
30. Tetsuya et al. discloses a motor (8), and the controller (12) is configured to provide open-loop and/or closed- loop control of the braking device. See Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 13 lines 32-33 “The electric winch apparatus includes a winch drum(5), a brake(6), a speed reducer(7), an electric motor(8) and inverter(9), a power source(10), a regenerative resistor(11)”. Col 4 paragraph 16 lines 8-10 “The electric motor(8) is driven by electric power which is supplied from the power source(10) through the inverter(9)”, see Fig 2, show open-loop and/or closed loop control braking device, particularly closed-loop, where the controller(12) receives feedback signals comprising of feedback from encoder(81) and current feedback that controls operation of the braking device, paragraph 22-30 describes a controller(12) designed to provide open loop and/or closed-loop feedback system and control of electric winch. Where the controller(12) obtains operating parameters from sensors, including a load meter(15), boom angle meter(17), ammeter(18) and tachometer(16) and controls the electric motor(8) in response to the measured input.
31. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly disclose work machine wherein the controller is configured to provide open loop and/or closed-loop control of the breaking device such that the braking torque from the braking device is greater than the target braking torque.
The winch control section(124) that inputs the brake control signal, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state” is known to also implements open loop and/or closed-loop control like the braking device. The open loop and/or closed-loop control are known methods as a feedback mechanism for winch control section and braking devices, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that this method of control could be integrated with the winch control section and breaking device to provide braking torque from the braking device that is greater than the target braking torque.
33. Therefore it would also have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to integrate the winch control section of Tetsuya et al(EP3498656) and breaking device with closed-loop control to provide braking torque from the braking device that is greater than the target braking torque. This kind of modification would have enabled the braking operation to be adjusted in response to the signal hence provide regulated braking of the load. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398(2007), see also MPEP 2144.04(v)(b)
34. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly disclose work machine wherein the motor is an internal combustion engine with fuel injection.
Internal combustion engines with fuel injection systems are well known alternatives to motors for providing a motive force.
35. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) electric motor, with an internal combustion engine having a fuel injection system for supplying fuel to the internal combustion engine, which would have enhanced the efficiency of the engine, as fuel injection is a conventional feature of the type of internal combustion engine considered. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have also recognized that the brake connected to and cooperating with the winch drum may be controlled through the winch control system to obtain coordinated operation.
36. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al in view of Liu et al.(CN203333210).
37. Regarding Claim 6, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
Tetsuya et al disclose work machine comprising a controller for controlling operation of the winch and braking system for generating a braking torque on the cable winch, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
38. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly disclose work machine further comprising a hydraulic braking device for braking the cable winch, which braking device can be activated by the controller as required instead of or parallel to the braking device of the motor for generating a braking torque on the cable winch, wherein the hydraulic braking device comprises at least one hydraulic brake with a hydraulic pump.
39. Liu et al discloses a work machine comprising a hydraulic braking device for braking the cable winch, wherein the hydraulic braking device comprises at least one hydraulic brake with a hydraulic pump, see ABSTRACT “The utility model discloses a winch operation system which comprises a hydraulic operation portion and a pneumatic operation portion. The hydraulic operation portion comprises a hydraulic oil tank, a hydraulic pump, a hydraulic brake, a hydraulic motor, a one-way balance valve, a shuttle valve, a three-position four-way reversing valve, an overflow valve, a pilot-operated safety valve and a winch”, paragraph 21 “The shuttle valve 7 is equivalent to a combination of two check valves, which transmits control signals to the hydraulic brake 4 according to the input signal requirements, so as to control the hydraulic brake 4 to operate”.
40. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate a controller as required of Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) with hydraulic brake device as taught by Liu et al.(CN203333210) for controlled braking of the cable winch having the ability to operate instead of or parallel to the braking device and generating a braking torque on the cable winch, thereby enhancing control of the winch.
41. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al in view of Liu et al.(CN203333210)
42. Regarding Claim 7, Tetsuya et al and person of ordinary skill in the art discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 6.
43. Tetsuya et al disclose work machine comprising a controller for controlling operation of the winch and braking system for generating a braking torque on the cable winch, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
44. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly disclose work machine wherein the controller is configured to brake a lowering of the load in a first braking phase via the hydraulic braking device and to reduce the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the hydraulic braking device in a subsequent second braking phase, while the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the braking device of the motor is increased.
45. Liu et al discloses a work machine comprising a hydraulic braking device for braking the cable winch, , see ABSTRACT “The utility model discloses a winch operation system which comprises a hydraulic operation portion and a pneumatic operation portion. The hydraulic operation portion comprises a hydraulic oil tank, a hydraulic pump, a hydraulic brake, a hydraulic motor, a one-way balance valve, a shuttle valve, a three-position four-way reversing valve, an overflow valve, a pilot-operated safety valve and a winch”, paragraph 21 “The shuttle valve 7 is equivalent to a combination of two check valves, which transmits control signals to the hydraulic brake 4 according to the input signal requirements, so as to control the hydraulic brake 4 to operate”.
46. However a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a controller having hydraulic braking device can be configured to regulate the respective braking scenarios(brake a lowering of the load in a first braking phase of the two braking devices and reducing the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the hydraulic braking device in a subsequent second braking phase while the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the braking device of the motor is increased), as controlling the timing and increase of the braking torque constitutes a known output of brake control. person of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that the braking torque can be transitioned between a motor braking contribution and a hydraulic braking contribution while maintain lowering the load
47. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the controller to brake a lowering of the load in a first braking phase and to reduce the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the hydraulic braking device in a subsequent second braking phase while the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the braking device of the motor is increased of Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) with hydraulic brake device as taught by Liu et al.(CN203333210), hence transitioning the braking torque and controlling the braking of the cable winch.
48. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al in view of Liu et al.(CN203333210)
49. Regarding Claim 8, Tetsuya et al in view of Liu et al.(CN203333210) discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 6.
50. Tetsuya et al disclose work machine comprising a controller for controlling operation of the winch and braking system for generating a braking torque on the cable winch, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
51. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly discloses work machine wherein the controller is configured to brake a lowering of the load via the braking device of the motor and to temporarily activate the hydraulic braking device only in the case of load events in which a detected current load exceeds a defined limit value.
52. Liu et al discloses a work machine comprising a hydraulic braking device for braking the cable winch, , see ABSTRACT “The utility model discloses a winch operation system which comprises a hydraulic operation portion and a pneumatic operation portion. The hydraulic operation portion comprises a hydraulic oil tank, a hydraulic pump, a hydraulic brake, a hydraulic motor, a one-way balance valve, a shuttle valve, a three-position four-way reversing valve, an overflow valve, a pilot-operated safety valve and a winch”, paragraph 19 “That is, the winch 3 can be wound up, unwound, and stopped by the manual operating handle of the three-position four-way reversing valve 8; the winch 3 can also be wound up, unwound, and stopped by operating the manual 5 handle of the three-position four-way reversing air valve 12. The two sets of operations ensure that if one set fails, the other set can still start the winch 3”, paragraph 21 “The shuttle valve 7 is equivalent to a combination of two check valves, which transmits control signals to the hydraulic brake 4 according to the input signal requirements, so as to control the hydraulic brake 4 to operate”.
53. However a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that when a motor braking is utilized during lowering and a hydraulic braking is available, the controller can be configured to activate the hydraulic braking. Detection of load exceeding a defined limit value in the case of load events is a common load condition where additional braking can be applied to control the operation of the winch. The person of ordinary skill in the art would have also known that the hydraulic braking device could be temporarily activated when a detected load that exceeds a defined limit occurs and this can be discontinued when the braking contribution is not required as the motor braking contribution provides the braking of the lowering load.
54. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the controller of Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) to temporarily activate the hydraulic breaking device of Liu et al.(CN20333321) when a detected current that exceeds a defined value occurs to provide breaking during heightened load events, hence obtaining controlled braking in the case of load events in which a detected current load exceeds a defined limit value.
55. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al
57. Regarding Claim 12, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 1.
58. Tetsuya et al does not disclose that the motor is an internal combustion engine.
59. Internal combustion engines with fuel injection systems are well known alternatives to motors for providing a motive force.
60. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) electric motor, with an internal combustion engine, as electric motors and internal combustion engines are alternative power sources in driving such work machine and their substitution would have yielded similar function. The substitution of one known element for another to get a predictable result represents a case-law for known substitutions under KSR. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398(2007)
61. Tetsuya et al. discloses a motor (8), and the controller (12) is configured to provide open-loop and/or closed- loop control of the braking device. See Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 13 lines 32-33 “The electric winch apparatus includes a winch drum(5), a brake(6), a speed reducer(7), an electric motor(8) and inverter(9), a power source(10), a regenerative resistor(11)”. Col 4 paragraph 16 lines 8-10 “The electric motor(8) is driven by electric power which is supplied from the power source(10) through the inverter(9)”, see Fig 2, show open-loop and/or closed loop control braking device, particularly closed-loop, where the controller(12) receives feedback signals comprising of feedback from encoder(81) and current feedback that controls operation of the braking device, paragraph 22-30 describes a controller(12) designed to provide open loop and/or closed-loop feedback system and control of electric winch. Where the controller(12) obtains operating parameters from sensors, including a load meter(15), boom angle meter(17), ammeter(18) and tachometer(16) and controls the electric motor(8) in response to the measured input.
62. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly disclose work machine wherein the controller is configured to provide open loop and/or closed-loop control of the breaking device such that the braking torque from the braking device is greater than the target braking torque, wherein the controller controls the speed of the motor via the fuel injection in such a way that the higher braking torque of the braking device is equalized and the target braking torque is set.
The winch control section(124) that inputs the brake control signal, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state” is known to also implements open loop and/or closed-loop control like the braking device. The open loop and/or closed-loop control are known methods as a feedback mechanism for winch control section and braking devices, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that this method of control could be integrated with the winch control section and breaking device to provide braking torque from the braking device that is greater than the target braking torque.
63. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have also recognized when an IC engine is employed as the motor, that it’s speed can be managed through the control of the fuel injection. 64. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have further recognized that the controller can synchronize such a motor speed with the braking device, such that when the braking torque increases the motor speed is controlled to achieve an higher braking torque of the braking device to be equalized and the desired target braking torque is set. This kind of synchronized control is a well known motor speed and braking control mechanism to maintain desired braking situation.
65. Therefore it would also have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the controller to regulate the speed of the IC motor via the fuel injection in response to higher braking torque of the equalized braking device as the target braking torque is set.
66. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al in view of Liu et al.(CN20333321)
67. Regarding Claim 13, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 11 .
68. Liu et al discloses a work machine wherein the work machine comprises a hydraulic braking device for braking the cable winch, see ABSTRACT “The utility model discloses a winch operation system which comprises a hydraulic operation portion and a pneumatic operation portion. The hydraulic operation portion comprises a hydraulic oil tank, a hydraulic pump, a hydraulic brake, a hydraulic motor, a one-way balance valve, a shuttle valve, a three-position four-way reversing valve, an overflow valve, a pilot-operated safety valve and a winch”, paragraph 19 “That is, the winch 3 can be wound up, unwound, and stopped by the manual operating handle of the three-position four-way reversing valve 8; the winch 3 can also be wound up, unwound, and stopped by operating the manual 5 handle of the three-position four-way reversing air valve 12. The two sets of operations ensure that if one set fails, the other set can still start the winch 3”, paragraph 21 “The shuttle valve 7 is equivalent to a combination of two check valves, which transmits control signals to the hydraulic brake 4 according to the input signal requirements, so as to control the hydraulic brake 4 to operate”.
69. Liu et al does not discloses a work machine wherein the controller brakes a lowering of the load via the braking device of the motor and temporarily activates the hydraulic braking device only in the case of load events in which a detected current load exceeds a defined limit value.
Tetsuya et al disclose work machine comprising a controller for controlling operation of the winch and braking system for generating a braking torque on the cable winch, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
70. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly discloses work machine wherein the controller is configured to brake a lowering of the load via the braking device of the motor and to temporarily activate the hydraulic braking device only in the case of load events in which a detected current load exceeds a defined limit value.
71. However a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that when a motor braking is utilized during lowering and a hydraulic braking is available, the controller can be configured to activate the hydraulic braking. Detection of load exceeding a defined limit value in the case of load events is a common load condition where additional braking can be applied to control the operation of the winch. The person of ordinary skill in the art would have also known that the hydraulic braking device could be temporarily activated when a detected load that exceeds a defined limit occurs and this can be discontinued when the braking contribution is not required as the motor braking contribution provides the braking of the lowering load.
72. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the controller of Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) to temporarily activate the hydraulic breaking device of Liu et al.(CN20333321) when a detected current that exceeds a defined value occurs to provide breaking during heightened load events, hence obtaining controlled braking in the case of load events in which a detected current load exceeds a defined limit value.
73. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al in view of Liu et al.(CN203333210)
39. . Regarding Claim 14, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 11 .
74. Liu et al discloses a work machine wherein the work machine comprises a hydraulic braking device for braking the cable winch, see ABSTRACT “The utility model discloses a winch operation system which comprises a hydraulic operation portion and a pneumatic operation portion. The hydraulic operation portion comprises a hydraulic oil tank, a hydraulic pump, a hydraulic brake, a hydraulic motor, a one-way balance valve, a shuttle valve, a three-position four-way reversing valve, an overflow valve, a pilot-operated safety valve and a winch”, paragraph 19 “That is, the winch 3 can be wound up, unwound, and stopped by the manual operating handle of the three-position four-way reversing valve 8; the winch 3 can also be wound up, unwound, and stopped by operating the manual 5 handle of the three-position four-way reversing air valve 12. The two sets of operations ensure that if one set fails, the other set can still start the winch 3”, paragraph 21 “The shuttle valve 7 is equivalent to a combination of two check valves, which transmits control signals to the hydraulic brake 4 according to the input signal requirements, so as to control the hydraulic brake 4 to operate”.
75. Liu et al does not explicitly discloses a work machine wherein the controller brakes a lowering of the load in a first braking phase via the hydraulic braking device, wherein, in a subsequent second braking phase, the controller reduces the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the hydraulic braking device and simultaneously increases the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the braking device of the motor, wherein the lowering speed of the load is kept constant during the transmission of the braking torque from the hydraulic braking device to the braking device of the motor.
77. However a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a controller having hydraulic braking device can be configured to regulate the respective braking scenarios(brake a lowering of the load in a first braking phase of the two braking devices and reducing the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the hydraulic braking device in a subsequent second braking phase, reduce the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the hydraulic braking device while the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the braking device of the motor is increased and lowering speed of the load as it is kept constant during transmission of the braking torque from the hydraulic braking device to the braking device of the motor), as controlling the timing and increase of the braking torque constitutes a known output of brake control. A person of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that the braking torque can be transitioned between a motor braking contribution and a hydraulic braking contribution while maintaining the lowering speed of the load is kept constant.
78. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the controller to brake a lowering of the load in a first braking phase and to reduce the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the hydraulic braking device in a subsequent second braking phase while the braking torque transmitted to the cable winch by the braking device of the motor is increased of Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) with hydraulic brake device as taught by Liu et al.(CN20333321), hence transitioning the braking torque and controlling the braking of the cable winch.
78. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) in view of Yeager et al (US 20120073265)
79. Re Claim 17, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of Claim 2.
80. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine comprising of braking device(4) of the motor(8).
81. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly disclose an air vane arranged in an exhaust duct and/or a throttle valve arranged in an intake duct and/or a decompression brake.
82. However, Yeager et al discloses an air vane arranged in an exhaust duct(18) and/or a throttle valve arranged in an intake duct and/or a decompression brake, see FIG 1, paragraph 9 “One aspect of the present disclosure is directed to an exhaust system for use with a combustion engine”, paragraph 18 “As hot exhaust gases exiting power system(10) move”, “and expand against vanes”, paragraph 16 “A throttle valve may be located upstream and /or downstream”, paragraph 17 “It is contemplated that exhaust system(18) may include different or additional components, than described above such as for example bypass components an exhaust compression or restriction brake”.
83. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to utilize Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) work machine, and air vane arranged in an exhaust duct(18) and/or a throttle valve arranged in an intake duct as taught by Yeager et al (US 201220073265) to improve the performance and efficiency of the work machine by reducing the circulation of exhaust gas in the system, paragraph 10 “The method include directing a flow of exhaust from a combustion engine”.
84. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al
85. Regarding Claim 18, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 4.
86. Tetsuya et al. discloses a motor (8), and the controller (12) is configured to provide open-loop and/or closed- loop control of the braking device. See Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 13 lines 32-33 “The electric winch apparatus includes a winch drum(5), a brake(6), a speed reducer(7), an electric motor(8) and inverter(9), a power source(10), a regenerative resistor(11)”. Col 4 paragraph 16 lines 8-10 “The electric motor(8) is driven by electric power which is supplied from the power source(10) through the inverter(9)”, see Fig 2, show open-loop and/or closed loop control braking device, particularly closed-loop, where the controller(12) receives feedback signals comprising of feedback from encoder(81) and current feedback that controls operation of the braking device, paragraph 22-30 describes a controller(12) designed to provide open loop and/or closed-loop feedback system and control of electric winch. Where the controller(12) obtains operating parameters from sensors, including a load meter(15), boom angle meter(17), ammeter(18) and tachometer(16) and controls the electric motor(8) in response to the measured input.
87. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine wherein the controller is configured to control a rotational speed of the motor, See Fig1 and Fig 2, paragraph 34-67 for configurations of controller, Col 4 paragraph 19 lines 24-28 “The speed reducer(7) transmits rotational force of the rotational shaft(8a) to the rotating shaft (5a) of the winch drum(5) while reducing a rotational speed of the rotating shaft(8a) of the electric motor(8) at a predetermined reduction ration”, Col 7 paragraph 35 “The speed control section(121) generates such a torque command as to make a deviation be 0 between the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) input from the speed calculation section(123) and the speed command value input from the winch control section(124). In the present embodiment, a negative sign and a positive sign are given to a rotational speed of electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating the winch drum(5) in the lowering direction and a rotational speed of the electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating winch drum(5) in the lifting direction, respectively, the signs making it possible to judge whether the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) is a speed in the lifting direction or the a speed in the lowering direction”, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
88. Tetsuya et al does not disclose that the motor is an internal combustion engine comprising of fuel injection.
89. Internal combustion engines with fuel injection systems are well known alternatives to motors for providing a motive force.
90. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have also recognized when an IC engine comprising a fuel injection system is employed as the motor, that it’s rotational speed can be controlled via the fuel injection system. To put this clearly, the controller is configured to control the rotational speed of the motor via at least a fuel injection system. This kind of synchronized control is a well-known motor speed control mechanism to maintain desired motor speed.
91. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) electric motor, with an internal combustion engine, as electric motors and internal combustion engines are alternative power sources in driving such work machine and their substitution would have yielded similar function. The substitution of one known element for another to get a predictable result represents a case-law for known substitutions under KSR. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398(2007).
92. It would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to configure the controller to provide open-loop and/or closed-loop control of the braking device and to control the rotational speed of the motor via a fuel-injection system when utilizing the IC engine alternative, as fuel injection control is a known method for regulating and controlling rotational speed of an IC engine
63
93. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al
94. Regarding Claim 19, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 5.
95. Tetsuya et al further discloses work machine wherein the controller is configured to control a rotational speed of the motor, See Fig1 and Fig 2, paragraph 34-67 for configurations of controller, Col 4 paragraph 19 lines 24-28 “The speed reducer(7) transmits rotational force of the rotational shaft(8a) to the rotating shaft (5a) of the winch drum(5) while reducing a rotational speed of the rotating shaft(8a) of the electric motor(8) at a predetermined reduction ration”, Col 7 paragraph 35 “The speed control section(121) generates such a torque command as to make a deviation be 0 between the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) input from the speed calculation section(123) and the speed command value input from the winch control section(124). In the present embodiment, a negative sign and a positive sign are given to a rotational speed of electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating the winch drum(5) in the lowering direction and a rotational speed of the electric motor(8) in a direction of rotating winch drum(5) in the lifting direction, respectively, the signs making it possible to judge whether the rotational speed of the electric motor(8) is a speed in the lifting direction or the a speed in the lowering direction”, Col 8 paragraph 40 lines 33-34 “The winch control section(124) inputs the brake control signal for bringing the brake(6) into braking state”.
62..
96. Tetsuya et al. further discloses a motor (8), and the controller (12) is configured to provide open-loop and/or closed- loop control of the braking device. See Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 13 lines 32-33 “The electric winch apparatus includes a winch drum(5), a brake(6), a speed reducer(7), an electric motor(8) and inverter(9), a power source(10), a regenerative resistor(11)”. Col 4 paragraph 16 lines 8-10 “The electric motor(8) is driven by electric power which is supplied from the power source(10) through the inverter(9)”,
97. Tetsuya et al does not disclose the work machine, wherein the controller is also configured to control a rotational speed of the motor, via the fuel injection such that the higher braking torque of the braking device is equalized and the target braking torque is set at the cable winch.
Internal combustion engines with fuel injection systems are well known alternatives to motors for providing a motive force.
98. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have further recognized that the controller can synchronize such a motor speed with the braking device, such that when the braking torque increases the motor speed is controlled to achieve an higher braking torque of the braking device to be equalized and the desired target braking torque is set. This kind of synchronized control is a well-known motor speed and braking control mechanism to maintain desired braking situation.
99. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have further recognized when an IC engine comprising a fuel injection system is employed as the motor, that it’s rotational speed can be controlled via the fuel injection system. To put this clearly, the controller is configured to control the rotational speed of the motor via at least a fuel injection system. This kind of synchronized control is a well-known motor speed control mechanism to maintain desired motor speed.
100. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) electric motor, with an internal combustion engine, as electric motors and internal combustion engines are alternative power sources in driving such work machine and their substitution would have yielded similar function. The substitution of one known element for another to get a predictable result represents a case-law for known substitutions under KSR. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398(2007).
101. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have further recognized that the motor speed control, via the injection can be synchronized with the braking device in a way that the higher braking torque of the braking device is equalized and the target braking torque is set at the cable winch, hence establishing the target braking torque.
102. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) in view of Liu et al.(CN20333321) in further view of Mundis et al.(US5163570)
103. Regarding Claim 20, Tetsuya et al discloses work machine and all the limitations of claim 9.
104. Tetsuya et al discloses work machine wherein the cable winch is connected to the motor via a transfer case, see Fig 1, Col 3 paragraph 14 lines 45-47 “The winch drum(5) is rotated by a torque applied from the electric motor(8). The winch drum(8) has a rotating shaft(5a)
105. Tetsuya et al does not explicitly disclose work machine comprising of a hydraulic breaking device.
106. Liu et al discloses a work machine wherein the work machine comprises a hydraulic braking device, see ABSTRACT “The utility model discloses a winch operation system which comprises a hydraulic operation portion and a pneumatic operation portion. The hydraulic operation portion comprises a hydraulic oil tank, a hydraulic pump, a hydraulic brake, a hydraulic motor, a one-way balance valve, a shuttle valve, a three-position four-way reversing valve, an overflow valve, a pilot-operated safety valve and a winch”,
107. Tetsuya et al in view of Liu et al does not explicitly disclose work machine wherein the cable winch is connected to the motor via a transfer case and can be driven via a closed hydraulic circuit connected between the transfer case and the cable winch.
108. Mundis et al discloses work machine comprising of closed hydraulic circuit for transmitting power to a lifting device, see ABSTRACT “ A hydraulic chamber on each side of the worm is formed by a bearing retainer and a piston. A worm thrust in the direction of either hydraulic chamber increases the fluid pressure in that particular chamber, which causes the fluid pressure in a closed hydraulic circuit to increase. The pressure increase is sensed by a fluid pressure gauge which sends a signal and/or terminates input power to the worm if the increase in fluid pressure is above a predetermined pressure, Col 4 lines 40-44 “One end of the T-shaped coupling is fluidly connected to a hydraulic pressure gauge 76 which senses a change in the hydraulic pressure in the closed hydraulic circuit”.
109. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a closed hydraulic circuit gives a known way for controlling and transmitting hydraulic power between coupled components and could easily connect these paths between the transfer case and cable winch.
110. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the work machine of Tetsuya et al (EP3498656) with hydraulic braking device of Liu et al.(CN203333210) and further modify with the closed hydraulic circuit of Mundis et al.(US5163570) connecting the motor via a transfer case and be driven via a closed hydraulic circuit connected between the transfer case and the cable winch and connecting the hydraulic device to the transfer case.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL T KIO whose telephone number is (571)270-0743. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8a.m -5 p.m..
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, Robert T Hodge can be reached at 571-272-2097. 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.
/MTK./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights