DETAILED ACTION
This is a first Office Action on the merits and is responsive to the originally filed application papers. Claims filed on 03/18/2025 are being examined. Claims 1-15 are being considered and further pending examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS(s)) submitted on 03/18/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
“first movement means (3) are designed for rotating the first segments…” recited in claims 10-14. For the purposes of examination, the examiner will take “first movement means” as comprising a hydraulic cylinders equivalent based on the following excerpt(s) from the specification:
“Preferably, the first movement means comprise a hydraulic cylinder 3 for each arm 2.”
“second movement means are designed for moving the second segments….” recited in claims 10-14. For the purposes of examination, the examiner will take “second movement means” as comprising a hydraulic cylinders equivalent based on the following excerpt(s) from the specification:
“The invention includes second movement means, for example comprising hydraulic cylinders (not shown), designed for moving individually the second segments 22a,b between the extended position and the closed position.”
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder (“a processing unit”) that is coupled with functional language (“to control”) without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are as follows:
“a processing unit configured to control…” recited in claims 10-14. For the purposes of examination, the examiner will take “a processing unit” as an electronic circuit, processor, or equivalent based on the following excerpt(s) from the specification:
“In practice, the processing unit may consist of a single electronic device, also of the type commonly present on this type of machine, suitably programmed to perform the functions described; the various modules can correspond to hardware units and/or software forming part of the programmed device.”
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.
Claims 1-15 are 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.
Claims 1 and 10 recite “wherein it comprises the following steps/a processing unit…” however, it is unclear what “it” is referring to as “it” could refer to the method/system or specific steps/components of the method/system.
Claims 2-9 and 11-14 are dependent on independent claims 1 and 10 respectively and do not cure the deficiencies thereof, therefore they are rejected for the same reason.
Claim 15 recites “such as a telescopic handler or the like” where “or the like” has been determined to be indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-9, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Iotti (US 20190010036 A1) henceforth referred to as Iotti.
Regarding Claim 1 Iotti teaches A method for controlling a scissor stabiliser (10) of self-propelled operating machines (1) comprising at least a pair of rotatable telescopic stabilising arms (2a, 2b), wherein each arm (2a, 2b) comprises (para [0001] : “This invention relates to a system for stabilizing self-propelled operating machines, in particular telescopic handlers or “telehandlers”.”, para [0019] : “FIG. 7 is a front view of a stabilizing unit which includes one of the two pairs of stabilizing arms which are provided in the system according to this invention;”):
a first segment (21a, 21b) rotatable between a raised position and an operating position (para [0037] : “The invention comprises first movement designed to individually rotate the arms 2 between a completely raised position and lowered working positions.”, Fig. 2);
a second segment (22a, 22b), slidable relative to the first segment (21a, 21b) between an extended position and a closed position and provided with a foot (20) for contact with the ground (para [0034] : “As shown in the accompanying drawings, the arms 2 include a first segment 21, or “sleeve”, which is hollow and in which is contained in a slidable fashion a second segment 22, or “sliding member”, which is equipped, at the distal end, with a supporting element, that is, the above-mentioned foot 20.”);
wherein the stabiliser (10) can be activated between an active configuration, in which the first segments (21a, 21b) are in the operating position and the second segments are in the extended position with the respective feet (20) resting on the ground, in such a way that wheels (11) of said machine (1) are raised from the ground, and an inactive configuration, in which the first segments (21a, 21b) are in the raised position and the second segments (22a, 22b) are in the closed position, in such a way that the wheels (11) rest on the ground (para [0027] : “The stabilizers 10 of the system proposed are designed to pass from operating configurations, wherein they stabilize the machine 1, raising the wheels above the ground, to a rest configuration, in which the wheels 11 are returned to the ground, and vice versa.”);
wherein it comprises the following steps for moving the stabilisers (10) from the active configuration to the inactive configuration (para [0103] : “Once the planned operations have been concluded, during which the machine 1 has been stabilized, the operator in the cabin starts the steps for retraction of the stabilizers 10, using a special command.”):
rotating the first segments (21 a, 21 b) from the operating position to an intermediate position (Am) (para [0105] : “Initially, the arms 2 raise by means of the rotation of the first segments 21 upwards, so that the wheels 11 first touch the ground (condition corresponding to that referred to above as the second partially raised position; FIG. 3), and then continue until reaching the first partially raised position, determined by the control parameter representing the first above-mentioned angle A (FIG. 4).”);
sliding the second segment (22a) of a first arm (2a) to the closed position (para [0107] : “At this point, the arms 2 are shortened, until the sensors of the second detecting means signal to the processing unit that the second segments 22 have reached the relative completely closed position, determined on the basis of the respective control parameter stored (see FIG. 5).”);
rotating the first segment (21 b) of a second arm (2b) from said intermediate position to the raised position (para [0108] : “Only after this step, the first segments are rotated again to the completely raised position, in which the retraction of the stabilizers 10 is concluded (FIG. 6).”);
sliding the second segment (22b) of the second arm (2b) to the closed position (para [0107] : “At this point, the arms 2 are shortened, until the sensors of the second detecting means signal to the processing unit that the second segments 22 have reached the relative completely closed position, determined on the basis of the respective control parameter stored (see FIG. 5).”);
rotating the first segment (21a) of the first arm (2a) from the intermediate position to the final position (para [0108] : “Only after this step, the first segments are rotated again to the completely raised position, in which the retraction of the stabilizers 10 is concluded (FIG. 6).”).
Regarding Claim 6 Iotti teaches The method according to claim1, further Iotti teaches wherein the first segments (21a, 21b) perform a total angle of rotation from the operating position to the raised position, said total angle of rotation depending on the constructional characteristics of the stabilising device and the stabilising conditions (para [0059] : “In effect, whilst in prior art systems, the complete retraction of the second segments in the first segments only occurs after the arms 2 have been moved to a horizontal position, the invention comprises a sequence of retraction wherein the second segments move to their position of minimum length, therefore with complete retraction, when the arms 2 are still in a partial retraction position; only after the sliding members are retracted do the arms 2 complete the rotation upwards to the final position of rest.”, wherein it is inherent that the system depends on the constructional characteristics as it would not be possible for the rotation to exceed constructional characteristic limitations and remain functional.).
Regarding Claim 7 Iotti teaches The method according to claim1, further Iotti teaches wherein in said intermediate position (Am) the angle of inclination of the first segments (21 a, 21 b) is greater than or equal to 50% of the total angle of rotation of the respective arms (2) ( para [0061] : “More generally speaking, in the first partially raised position, the arms 2 are set at an angle A different from zero relative to an ideal plane P integral to the supporting structure 100 mentioned several times above (see FIG. 5).”, para [0063] : “Preferably, the above-mentioned angle A is equal to 4°, although, as will be explained in more detail below, the invention can operate perfectly even with a different inclination.”, Fig. 5, Fig. 5 shows the angle A as being 4 degrees down from a 0 degree horizontal angle with respect to the vehicle body which is a rotation of greater than 50% of the total angle of rotation of the respective arms).
Regarding Claim 8 Iotti teaches The method according to claim1, further Iotti teaches wherein, in the inactive configuration of the stabilisers (10), the arms (2) are inclined upwards (para [0052] : “retracting the second segments to a completely closed position (FIG. 5);”, Fig. 5, Fig. 5 shows an incline to the completely closed position of the arms.).
Regarding Claim 9 Iotti teaches The method according to claim 1, further Iotti teaches wherein in the completely closed position of the second segments (22), the arms (2) have a minimum length (para [0052] : “retracting the second segments to a completely closed position (FIG. 5);”, Fig. 5, the segments have at least a minimum length of the length of the second segments.).
Regarding Claim 10 Iotti teaches A stabilising system for a self-propelled operating machine (1) comprising at least two scissor stabilisers (10), designed to adopt an active configuration, in which they stabilise the machine (1) raising the wheels (11) of the machine (1) from the ground, and an inactive configuration, in which said wheels (11) are rested on the ground, wherein (para [0027] : “The stabilizers 10 of the system proposed are designed to pass from operating configurations, wherein they stabilize the machine 1, raising the wheels above the ground, to a rest configuration, in which the wheels 11 are returned to the ground, and vice versa.”, Fig. 1):
each stabiliser (10) comprises at least one pair of rotatable telescopic stabilising arms (2a, 2b) (para [0024] : “Preferably, the stabilizers 10 provided in the system according to the invention are of the so-called “scissor” or “X” type, and include two pairs of telescopic arms 2, for example with a single sliding member, located at the front and at the rear of the vehicle 1, in the proximity of the wheels 11.”);
each arm (2a, 2b) comprises a first segment (21a, 21b), rotatable between a raised position and an operating position, and a second segment (22a, 22b), slidable relative to the first segment (21a, 21b) between an extended position and a closed position and provided with a foot (20) for contact with the ground (para [0028] : “In practice, the stabilizing arms 2 are movable between a raised position, wherein they are distanced from the ground (see FIG. 6), and in particular freely allow the driving of the vehicle 1, and at least one lowered operating position (FIGS. 1 and 2), wherein they are rested on the ground to initiate the stabilization.”, Fig. 2);
first movement means (3) are designed for rotating the first segments (21a, 21b) between said raised position and said operating position;
second movement means are designed for moving the second segments (22a, 22b) between said closed position and said extended position;
wherein it comprises a processing unit configured to control said first and second movement means to carry out the following steps (para [0071] : “In practice, acting continuously on a command, for example a joystick, a lever or the like, the stabilizing arms perform the retraction sequence predetermined by the processing unit; in this case, the operator can interrupt the sequence, for safety reasons, simply by releasing the command.”):
rotating the first segments (21a, 21b) from the operating position to an intermediate position (para [0105] : “Initially, the arms 2 raise by means of the rotation of the first segments 21 upwards, so that the wheels 11 first touch the ground (condition corresponding to that referred to above as the second partially raised position; FIG. 3), and then continue until reaching the first partially raised position, determined by the control parameter representing the first above-mentioned angle A (FIG. 4).”);
sliding the second segment (22a) of a first arm (2a) to the closed position (para [0107] : “At this point, the arms 2 are shortened, until the sensors of the second detecting means signal to the processing unit that the second segments 22 have reached the relative completely closed position, determined on the basis of the respective control parameter stored (see FIG. 5).”);
rotating the first segment (21 b) of a second arm (2b) from said intermediate position to the raised position (para [0108] : “Only after this step, the first segments are rotated again to the completely raised position, in which the retraction of the stabilizers 10 is concluded (FIG. 6).”);
sliding the second segment (22b) of the second arm (2b) to the closed position (para [0107] : “At this point, the arms 2 are shortened, until the sensors of the second detecting means signal to the processing unit that the second segments 22 have reached the relative completely closed position, determined on the basis of the respective control parameter stored (see FIG. 5).”);
rotating the first segment (21a) of the first arm (2a) from the intermediate position to the final position (para [0108] : “Only after this step, the first segments are rotated again to the completely raised position, in which the retraction of the stabilizers 10 is concluded (FIG. 6).”).
Regarding Claim 15 Iotti teaches A self-propelled operating machine (1), such as a telescopic handler or the like, comprising a stabilizing system according to claim 1 (para [0001] : “This invention relates to a system for stabilizing self-propelled operating machines, in particular telescopic handlers or “telehandlers”.”).
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.
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iotti.
Regarding Claim 2 Iotti teaches The method according to claim 1, further Iotti renders obvious wherein said step of rotating the first segments (21 a, 21 b) from the operating position to an intermediate position (Am) comprises a first rotation, which moves the first segments (21a, 21b) from the operating position to a reference position between the rest position and the intermediate position (Am), and a second rotation, in which the first segments (21a, 21b) rotate in the opposite direction from the reference position to the intermediate position (Am) (para [0115] : “In detail, the rotation of the arms 2 to the first partial position is achieved by initially rotating the arms 2 to a second partially raised position, lower than the first position, wherein the feet still rest on the ground, thereby allowing the resting of the wheels 11 of the machine 1, after which the arms 2 rotate to the first position.”, where a second partially raised position can be arbitrarily chosen as a design choice including a position below or beyond a first intermediate position.).
Regarding Claim 3 Iotti teaches The method according to claim 1, further Iotti renders obvious wherein the sliding of the second segment (22a) of a first arm (2a) up to the closed position and the rotation of the first segment (21 b) of the second arm (2b) from said intermediate position to the raised position occur simultaneously (para [0057] : “It should be noted that, preferably, the arms 2 of both the pairs move together, even though this does not exclude solutions in which the arms 2 can have off-set movements, providing the above-mentioned sequence is complied with.”, where the finite set of states of off-set movements comprises the states of the second segment of the first arm sliding up to the closed position and the rotation of the first segment of the second arm from the intermediate position to the raise position occur simultaneously.).
Regarding Claim 4 Iotti teaches The method according to claim 1, further Iotti renders obvious wherein the sliding of the second segment (22b) of the second arm (2b) to the closed position and the rotation of the first segment (21a) of the first arm (2a) from the intermediate position to the final position occur simultaneously (para [0057] : “It should be noted that, preferably, the arms 2 of both the pairs move together, even though this does not exclude solutions in which the arms 2 can have off-set movements, providing the above-mentioned sequence is complied with.”, where the finite set of states of off-set movements comprises the states of sliding the second segment of the second arm to the closed position and the rotation of the first segment of the first arm from the intermediate to the final position occur simultaneously.).
Regarding Claim 5 Iotti teaches The method according to claim1, wherein the rotation of the first segment (21 b) of a second arm (2b) from said intermediate position to the raised position and the sliding of the second segment (22b) of the second arm (2b) to the closed position occur simultaneously (para [0057] : “It should be noted that, preferably, the arms 2 of both the pairs move together, even though this does not exclude solutions in which the arms 2 can have off-set movements, providing the above-mentioned sequence is complied with.”, where the finite set of states of off-set movements comprises the states of rotation of the first segment of a second arm from intermediate to the raised position and sliding of the second segment of the second arm to the closed position occur simultaneously.).
Regarding Claim 11, it recites a system with limitations substantially the same as claim 2 above, therefore it is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding Claim 12, it recites a system with limitations substantially the same as claim 3 above, therefore it is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding Claim 13, it recites a system with limitations substantially the same as claim 4 above, therefore it is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding Claim 14, it recites a system with limitations substantially the same as claim 5 above, therefore it is rejected for the same reason.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Tressler et al (US 20230264931 A1) teaches a lift vehicle includes a chassis, an implement, a lift arm coupling the implement to the chassis, a load sensor, a tilt sensor, and a controller. The lift arm includes an actuator configured to selectively extend the lift arm and a length sensor configured to provide data relating to a length of the lift arm. The load sensor can provide data relating to a load at the implement. The tilt sensor can provide data relating to an angular orientation of the chassis relative to a reference plane. The controller can receive data from the length sensor, the load sensor, and the tilt sensor. The controller can determine, based on the data from the load sensor and the tilt sensor, an operating envelope for the lift arm. The operating envelope can include a maximum extension of the lift arm. The controller can selectively limit an operation of the lift arm such that the lift arm operates within the operating envelope.
Grivetti et al (US 9777491 B2) teaches machines and system for 3D printing are disclosed. One machine includes a machine frame having a plurality of ground engaging elements to facilitate movement of the machine frame, a telescoping boom pivotably coupled to the machine frame and configured to pivot along at least a horizontal plane, a material line coupled to the boom and configured to convey a material therethrough, a printhead coupled to the boom and in fluid communication with the material line to receive the material and to dispense the material, and a controller configured to receive 3D printing information and to convert the 3D printing information into positional coordinates of the printhead, wherein the controller is to cause movement of the boom to position the printhead based at least on the position coordinates.
Lyle et al (US 20160122973 A1) teaches a working machine comprising: a base assembly including a ground engaging structure; an undercarriage connected to the ground engaging structure; a superstructure connected to the undercarriage; a working arm mounted to the superstructure; a connector connecting the undercarriage to the superstructure; and a drive arrangement located in the base assembly for moving the ground engaging structure to propel, in use, the working machine.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID HATCH whose telephone number is (571)272-4518. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, James J Lee can be reached on 571-270-5965. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/D.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/IMRAN K MUSTAFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
7/13/2026
Prosecution Insights