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 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, the claim ends with a comma and must end with a period. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-2 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 12421088 B2 (Zolotarev et al.).
Regarding claim 1, Zolotarev et al. disclose:
A posture correction apparatus comprising:
a plurality of correction units (1100, figure 11) each provided for a corresponding one of a plurality of wheels (710, figure 7) of a vehicle independent of another wheel (lifting assemblies 1100 include wheel support plates 105, one for each tire 710 as shown in figure 7); and
a control apparatus (320) that controls the correction units,
wherein each of the correction units is provided for a corresponding one of the plurality of wheels in a 1:1 ratio,
wherein each of the plurality of correction units includes:
a conveyor (170, 172, 1170) that moves a corresponding wheel in a left-right direction of the vehicle, and
a lifter (1110, 1112) that moves the conveyor in an up-down direction, and
wherein the control apparatus independently controls at least an operation of the lifter of each of the correction units (320 controls the left/right and backward/forward movement of each assembly 1100, col. 7, lines 20-40).
Regarding claim 2, Zolotarev et al. further disclose:
wherein the conveyor includes:
a plurality of rollers (172) that rotate in the left-right direction of the vehicle,
a pushing member (170) that moves on an upper side of the plurality of rollers, and
a first motor (1170) that moves the pushing member in a direction in which the rollers rotate (“When the motor 1170 moves or rotates the trackwidth chain 1172, the lift carriage 1174 including the clamp 170 and roller 172 are translated laterally with respect to the second axis 142 to adjust the clamp 170 according to the trackwidth dimensions of the vehicle.” col. 11, lines 6-11).
Regarding claim 9, Zolotarev et al. further disclose:
wherein a wheel of the plurality of wheels may include one of a single tire and double tire (710 represents a single tire).
Regarding claim 10, Zolotarev et al. disclose:
A posture correction apparatus comprising:
a plurality of correction units (1100), wherein each of the plurality of correction units correspond to each position of a plurality of wheels (710) of the vehicle independent of another position of the plurality of wheels (figure 7); and
a control apparatus (320) that controls the correction units,
wherein each of the plurality of correction units includes:
a conveyor (170, 172, 1172) that moves a corresponding wheel in a left-right direction of the vehicle, and
a lifter (1100) that moves the conveyor in an up-down direction, and
wherein the control apparatus independently controls an operation of the lifter of each of the correction units (320 controls the left/right and backward/forward movement of each assembly 1100, col. 7, lines 20-40).
Regarding claim 11, Zolotarev et al. further disclose:
wherein a number of the plurality of correction units is in a 1:1 ratio to a number of positions of the plurality of wheels of the vehicle (there are four correction units corresponding to four wheels, one for each front-left, front-right, back-left, and back-right positions of the plurality of wheels),
Regarding claim 12, Zolotarev et al. further disclose:
wherein the number of the plurality of correction units and the number of positions of the plurality of wheels of the vehicle is at least four (there are four wheels 710 and four correction units, each correction unit 1100 including one support plate 105, figure 7).
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.
Claims 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12421088 B2 (Zolotarev et al.) in view of CN 209065343 U (Gao).
Regarding claim 3, Zolotarev et al. teach:
The posture correction apparatus according to claim 2,
wherein the lifter includes a second motor (1150) for lifting the conveyor.
Zolotarev et al. do not teach that the control apparatus individually controls the first motor and the second motor.
However,
However, Gao teaches:
A posture correction apparatus with a control apparatus, and
wherein the control apparatus individually controls the first motor and the second motor (12, Gao, controls the pushing members and lifters, figure 2 and pages 4-5 of the machine translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the main controller of Zolotarev et al. individually control the first motor and the second motor, as taught by Gao, for precision movement of the vehicle. The first motor controls the position of the wheel on the individual conveyor and the second motor controls the lift height of the wheel. It would be obvious to have the controller control each motor separately so the lateral position and lift height can be adjusted independently of each other.
Regarding claim 8, Zolotarev et al. teach:
The posture correction apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each conveyor has an elevation amount that is adjustable (“each motorized lift having an adjustable height to raise and lower the platform, the height measured with respect to a third axis that is orthogonal to the first and second axes,” col. 1, lines 48-51).
Zolotarev et al. do not discuss the control process for calculating and adjusting the elevation amount.
However, Gao teaches:
A posture correction apparatus with a control apparatus, and
wherein the control apparatus calculates an elevation amount of the conveyor for each of the correction units, and individually controls the lifter based on the elevation amount of the conveyor (Step 3 of the method described on page 4 of the previously provided machine translation, “the controller 12 controls the hydraulic station 13… the rear wheel locating device 36 of the sixth hydraulic cylinder 3 respectively drive the first fork 25 and the second fork 35 rises to high with a low level until it reaches a respective predetermined height, the vehicle body and the power battery mounting surface is in horizontal state”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the control apparatus to calculate and adjust the elevation amount of each lifter, as taught by Gao, to quantitatively measure if the vehicle is in a level, horizontal position and make adjustments as needed.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12421088 B2 (Zolotarev et al.) in view of CN 209065343 U (Gao) and further in view of CN 116227015 A (Zhang et al.).
Regarding claim 4, Zolotarev et al. and Gao teach:
The posture correction apparatus according to claim 3,
further comprising a first detection apparatus (600, Zolotarev et al.) that detects placement of the wheel on the conveyor.
Zolotarev et al. are silent to the process of the overall controller in response to the detection apparatus.
However, Zhang et al. teach:
A posture correction apparatus with a conveyor, and
further comprising a first detection apparatus (weight obtaining device 201) that detects placement of the wheel on the conveyor,
wherein when the first detection apparatus detects that all of the plurality of wheels are placed on the conveyor of the plurality of correction units (“the weight obtaining device 201 is used for obtaining the full vehicle load parameter of the target vehicle” page 15 of the attached machine translation, embodiment 2, second paragraph), the control apparatus controls the first motor of the conveyor to start movement of the pushing member (paragraph 6 under embodiment 2, page 15 describes the operation of the control apparatus in response to the weight obtaining device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the detection apparatus of Zolotarev et al. to communicate with the controller and for the controller to initiate movement of the pushing member of the apparatus of Zolotarev et al. and Gao, as taught by Zhang et al., to move the wheel into the desired position as indicated by the detection apparatus.
Regarding claim 5, Zhang et al. further teach:
further comprising a second detection apparatus (page 14, paragraph 8, line 3 “wheel distance adjusting position detecting device…pressure sensor”) that detects a load applied to the first motor (pressure exerted by driving device 800 through pushing members 610, 710 on the wheels),
wherein when the second detection apparatus detects that the load applied to all of the first motors in the plurality of correction units is equal to or greater than a threshold after movement of the pushing member is started, the control apparatus controls the first motor to stop the movement of the pushing member (steps 114-117, page 14 of the machine translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide pressure sensors as taught by Zhang et al. to the apparatus of Zolotarev et al. and Gao to stop the motor when the ideal pressure is exceeded in order to prevent damage to either the wheels or the motor. Page 13, lines 25-27 of Zhang et al., “In order to avoid the first pushing member 610 and the second pushing member 710 pushing excessive to cause the wheel, damage 112, after obtaining the first rotating value of the rotating member further comprises the following steps:”. The control system of Zhang et al. teaches using a measurement of the angular rotation of the rotating member that controls the pushing members and/or pressure sensors to evaluate the forces being exerted by the driving device onto the wheels of the vehicle to stop movement when a threshold is reached to prevent damage.
Regarding claim 6, Gao further teaches:
wherein the control apparatus (12) starts control of the lifter after stopping the movement of the pushing members of all of the conveyors of the plurality of correction units (page 4 of the machine translation of Gao, steps 2-3 describe how the controller controls the wheel positioning devices in step 2 before operating the lifting cylinders in step 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the lifter of Zolotarev et al. after cessation of the pushing members, as taught by Gao, to prevent damage to the vehicle that may be caused by instability of lateral movement during lifting.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12421088 B2 (Zolotarev et al.) in view of CN 209065343 U (Gao) in view of CN 116227015 A (Zhang et al.), as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of CN 112456383 A (Wu et al.).
Regarding claim 7, Zolotarev et al., Gao, and Zhang et al. teach:
The posture correction apparatus according to claim 6.
Gao discusses maintaining a horizontal position of the vehicle; however, Zolotarev et al., Gao, and Zhang et al. are silent to a particular detection apparatus for detecting the inclination of the vehicle.
However, Wu et al. teach:
A lifting device comprising a conveyor, and
further comprising a third detection apparatus (inclination angle sensor, not shown, claim 4) that detects an inclination of the vehicle,
And the combination of Zolotarev et al., Gao, Zhang et al., and Wu et al. teaches:
wherein the control apparatus (12, Gao) controls each of the lifters of the plurality of correction units in accordance with the inclination (as detected by the inclination angle sensor, Wu et al.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an inclination angle sensor as taught by Wu et al. in the apparatus of Zolotarev et al., Gao, and Zhang et al. to precisely determine the tilt angle of the vehicle and prevent unintentional slipping or movement of the vehicle during lifting and maintenance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 24, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 12-13 of the Remarks, Applicant notes the revisions made to the drawings. These revisions are found to be acceptable to the Examiner and the drawing objection is withdrawn.
Regarding the argument on pages 13-14 that the newly added limitations “independent of another wheel” and “each of the correction units is provided for a corresponding one of the plurality of wheels in a 1:1 ratio” are not taught by the prior art cited in the Non-Final rejection, this feature is taught by Zolotarev et al., not relied upon in the Non-Final rejection.
On page 15, Applicant notes the value of the limitations in newly added claim 8 allowing for precise leveling. Zolotarev et al. teach measuring the height of each lifter and conveyor and Gao teaches the individual control of the lifters to provide the desired effect of precise leveling.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE M MUDWILDER whose telephone number is (571)272-6068. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 am - 7:30 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, ROBERT 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.
/M.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights