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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “to adjust a position of the gun position” should read “to adjust a position of the gun”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 9- 12, 15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjorklund (US 2021/0108380) in view of Crocker (US 2021/0170434) and Puruczky (US 20200149955).
As to claims 1 and 17, Bjorklund discloses a system and method for placing a marker (see abstract). The system comprises a gun configured place an adhesive on the road surface (see 0033-0034); a marker placement device configured to place a pavement marker onto the adhesive (see 0025); a sensor that measures the distance at which the gun and placement device are moving (see 0033); and a processor configured to determine a first time to activate the gun to place the attachment material onto the road (the timing system determines when the system as traveled a predetermined distance and send a signal to dispense adhesive (see 0033-0034); and determines a second time to eject the pavement marker over the adhesive (see 0034).
Bjorklund fails to teach the attachment is a melted substance and the sensors are configured to measure a speed at which the gun and placement device are moving as required by claims 1 and 17 or the gun is a thermoplastic ribbon gun having a heating element to maintain the melted attachment substance at a specific temperature as required by claim 2.
Bjorklund does state the attachment substance can be thermoplastic (see 0039).
Crocker discloses dispensing a heated material for markings to the roadway using a thermoplastic gun with a heated cavity (see 0067).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bjorklund to include the heated thermoplastic gun of Crocker. One would have been motivated to do so because both references are directed to using a gun to dispense thermoplastic onto a roadway where Christensen et al. states the adhesive is heated when applied and Crocker teaches an operable gun for dispensing a heated thermoplastic material.
As to the limitation of measuring speed, Puruczky discloses a control system for roadway marking and placement in which activation timing of dispensing device is calculated based on vehicle speed and spacing between application devices in order to properly position markings or devices on the roadway (see 0033, 0039, and 0051).
It would have been obvious to determine activation timing in the system of Bjorklund based on speed and distance relationships as taught by Puruczky, since distance, speed, and time are mathematically related and speed-based timing control is known alternate method used in roadway marking placement system.
As to claim 7, Bjorklund teaches the sensors are magnetic rpm sensors that rotate as the axel rotates (see 0033).
As to claim 9, Bjorklund discloses the processor determines when to active the adhesive dispensing gun based on distance traveled and speed of the system in order to place pavement markers at predetermined spacing. Determining activation timing based on speed and distance requires calculating timing using a predetermined formula relating distance, speed, and time. Therefore, Bjorklund teaches calculating a time to activate the gun based on speed using a predetermined calculation.
As to claim 10, Puruczky teaches the system compensates for variable speeds (see 0036).
As to claims 11-12, and 18, Puruczky teaches calculates activation timing based on speed and spacing between devices. Puruczky teaches the system compensates for variable speeds (see 0036). It would have been obvious to calculate the second activation time based on speed and distance between the gun and marker placement device and adjust such calculations based on the variable speeds to maintain the desired spacing between markers.
As to claim 15, the process is repeated until the desired number of road markers have been placed (see 0017), thereby teaching repeating determining subsequent times and activating the gun and marker placement device.
As to claim 19, Bjorklund in view of Crocker and Puruczky disclose a system controlled by a timing system that determines when to activate adhesive dispensing and marker placement devices based on vehicle movement. Implementing such control logic in a computer-readable medium containing instructions executable by a process would have been obvious because machine control systems commonly store executable instructions for controlling automated equipment.
As to claim 20, Puruczky teaches calculates activation timing based on speed and spacing between devices. Puruczky teaches the system compensates for variable speeds (see 0036). It would have been obvious to calculate the second activation time based on speed and distance between the gun and marker placement device and adjust such calculations based on the variable speeds to maintain the desired spacing between markers. Implementing such control logic in a computer-readable medium containing instructions executable by a process would have been obvious because machine control systems commonly store executable instructions for controlling automated equipment.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjorklund (US 2021/0108380) in view of Crocker (US 2021/0170434) and Puruczky (US 20200149955) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Rose (US 3561398) and Wilkens et al. (US 2022/0098804).
The teachings of Bjorklund, Crocker, and Puruczky as applied to claim 2 are as stated above.
Bjorklund modified by Crocker and Puruczky fails to teach the gun is mounted on a swinging parallel arm mechanism to adjust a position of the gun in relation to the road surface as required by claim 3.
Rose discloses a sprayer supported by parallel linkage boom arm mechanism to allow the spray to swing up and down to adjust position relative to a contoured surface (see abstract, col. 4, lines 47-59).
Wilkens discloses a roadway marking system including an applicator whose position is adjusted relative to road surface in response to roadway contours to ensure proper alignment and application of the marking material (see abstract, 0039).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bjorklund, Crocker, and Puruczky to mount the gun on a parallel linkage arm as taught by Rose. One would have been motivated to do so since it is known that roads can have varying contours on its surface as shown by Wilkens and Rose disclose a mechanism to adjust the position of the applicator based on such contours on a surface in order to improve the accuracy of the application.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjorklund (US 2021/0108380) in view of Crocker (US 2021/0170434) and Puruczky (US 20200149955) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bradski et al. (US 2016/0221187) and Michiharu et al. (US20200332483)
The teachings of Bjorklund, Crocker, and Puruczky as applied to claim 1 are as stated above.
Bjorklund fails to teach the marker placement device comprises a robotic arm equipped with a suction mechanism to hold and place the marker as required by claim 4.
Michiharu et al. discloses a work vehicle including a marker placement device. The marker device comprises a suction for retaining the marker until it is placed on the road (see 0112).
Bradski et al. discloses an object pickup device comprising a robotic arm and suction gripper to hold the object in place until it is moved to the specified location (see 0004).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bjorklund, Crocker, and Puruczky to include the robotic arm with suction mechanism as taught by Bradski et al. in order to improve the automated placement and handling of the markers especially since Michiharu et al. teaches such suction gripping devices can be used with placement of road markers.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjorklund (US 2021/0108380) in view of Crocker (US 2021/0170434), Puruczky (US 20200149955), Bradski et al. (US 2016/0221187) and Michiharu et al. (US20200332483) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Rose (US 3561398) and Wilkens et a. (US 2022/0098804).
The teachings of Bjorklund, Crocker, Puruczky, Bradski et al., and Michiharu et al. as applied to claim 4 are as stated above.
Bjorklund, Crocker, Puruczky, Bradski et al., and Michiharu et al. fail to teach the placement device includes revolving parallel arm system as required by claim 5.
Rose discloses a sprayer supported by parallel linkage boom arm mechanism to allow the spray to swing up and down to adjust position relative to a contoured surface (see abstract, col. 4, lines 47-59).
Wilkens discloses a roadway marking system including an applicator whose position is adjusted relative to road surface in response to roadway contours to ensure proper alignment and application of the marking material (see abstract, 0039).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bjorklund, Crocker, Puruczky , Bradski, and Michiharu et al. to mount the gun on a parallel linkage arm as taught by Rose. One would have been motivated to do so since it is known that roads can have varying contours on its surface as shown by Wilkens and Rose disclose a mechanism to adjust the position of the applicator based on such contours on a surface in order to improve the accuracy of the application.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjorklund (US 2021/0108380) in view of Crocker (US 2021/0170434), Puruczky (US 20200149955), Bradski et al. (US 2016/0221187), Michiharu et al. (US20200332483) ,Rose (US 3561398) and Wilkens et al. (US 2022/0098804) as applied to claim 5 above and in further view of Anderson (US 4974990).
The teachings of Bjorklund, Crocker, Puruczky , Bradski et al., Michiharu et al., Rose, and Wilkins et al. as applied to claim 5 are as stated above.
Bjorklund, Crocker, Puruczky , Bradski et al., Michiharu et al., Rose, and Wilkins et al. fails to teach the placement device is equipped with a tensioned vertical slide to apply pressure on the marker for adhesion as required by claim 6.
Anderson discloses a pavement marker applicator comprising a means for discharging an adhesive, and for dispensing a pavement marker on the top of the adhesive (see abstract). The dispensing device includes an alignment mechanism that moves downward to depress the marker on to the adhesive deposit (see col. 7, lines 1-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bjorklund modified by Crocker, Puruczky, Bradski et al., Michiharu et al., Rose, and Wilkins et al. to include the vertically moveable pressing mechanism of Anderson in order to apply pressure to the marker after placement to improve its adhesion to the roadway surface.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjorklund (US 2021/0108380) in view of Crocker (US 2021/0170434) and Puruczky (US 20200149955), as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Dolinar et al. (US 2016/0209511).
The teachings of Bjorklund, Crocker and Puruczky as applied to claim 7 are as stated above.
Bjorklund, Crocker, and Puruczky fail to teach one or more of the sensors include a GPS component to provide data for speed and location as required by claim 8.
Dolinar et al. discloses an apparatus for locating, inspecting and placing roadway markers (see abstract). The apparatus includes a speed detector, location receiver to provide location and speed (see 0085) of the vehicle holding the nozzle for placement of the marker (see 0077-0079).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bjorklund and Crocker to include the GPS sensor of Dolinar et al. to further provide location data improving the accuracy and tracking of the vehicle movement.
Claim(s) 13-14, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjorklund (US 2021/0108380) in view of Crocker (US 2021/0170434), Puruczky (US 20200149955) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Wilkens (US 2022/0088804).
The teachings of Bjorklund, Crocker, and as applied to claims 1 and 11 are as stated above.
Bjorklund, Crocker, and Puruczky fail to teach the processors use a feedback loop to refine subsequent calculations for times to activate the marker placement device by comparing actual placement with intended placement as required by claim 13.
Wilkens discloses a roadway marking system that includes a contour sensor that provides real-time information regrading groove position, and based on the contour information, a marking material applicator is aligned with the groove to ensure proper placement. Wilkens further teaches monitoring the parameters and comparing with predetermined thresholds to determine compliance or non-compliance and making adjustments (see 0008, 0011, 0063-65).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the feedback system of Wilkens into the placement system of Bjorklund modified by Crocker and Puruczky in order to improve placement accuracy by refining subsequent placement timing and positioning based on actual results.
As to claim 14, Wilkens states the system can include a database or storage of historical data (See 0055, 0059).
As to claim 16, Wilkens states the system can receive user input to initiate the system (see 0055).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Green (US 5934822) discloses a system for installing road markers. The system comprises a gun (nozzle glue dispenser) for placing an adhesive onto a road surface (see col. 5, lines 40-45; col. 6, line 51-52); a marker placement device for placing the marker onto the adhesive (see H of Figs. 1 and 5); a sensor that detects movement of the apparatus which signal a computer, which then signals to parts of the apparatus to activate or deactivate (see col. 6, lines 19-24; col. 26, lines 9-27).
Garcia (US 2003/0210975) discloses a system for placing safety cones from a moving vehicle. The system comprises a receptable attached to the vehicle holding the cones and a release means that automatically controls the safety cones for placement in different location on a road (see abstract). Garcia teaches the system automatically releases cones at predetermined distances using sensor data such as vehicle speed, distance traveled, time, and feedback sensors (see 0039) improving efficiency, placement accuracy, and worker safety.
Webb et al. (US 2020/0071893) discloses a road marker placement system that comprises a dispenser for dispensing the road marker; a speed sensor connected on the wheel of the carriage holding the dispenser (see 0119); and a control arrangement. The speed sensor is connected to the wheel and measures the speed of rotation of the wheel; this information is sent to the control arrangement. The control arrangement processes the information for the speed sensor to control the placement device (See 00120).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Cachet I Proctor whose telephone number is (571)272-0691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-3 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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/CACHET I. PROCTOR/
Examiner
Art Unit 1712
/CACHET I PROCTOR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights