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: the claim contains a typo and recites “at least one of the visual alert of the audible alert” (emphasis added) instead of “at least one of the visual or audible alert”. 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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whikehart et. al. (US Patent Publication 2020/0377113) in view of Beach et. al. (US Patent Publication 2018/0129220).
Regarding claim 1, Whikehart discloses a vehicle, comprising: a frame; a drive system coupled to the frame to propel and steer the vehicle; an energy storage device configured to provide power to the drive system; (abstract; ¶104)
at least one of an audio output device or a visual output device; and a controller comprising one or more memory devices having instructions stored thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: determine a condition of the vehicle; and (¶7, 31-33, 87)
provide an alert, via the at least one audio output device or visual output device based on the determined condition, wherein the determined condition is at least one of a plurality of conditions, and wherein each condition of the plurality of conditions is associated with a unique alert, the unique alert comprising at least one unique aspect specific to the condition relative to the other conditions of the plurality of conditions. (¶23-31, 33, 48-52, 81)
The invention of Whikehart is directed towards a generic vehicle and thus remains silent as to so specific vehicle types and in particular a lift implement coupled to the frame, the lift implement comprising a cradle and a lift assembly configured to adjust a position of the cradle relative to the frame.
Beach however teaches a vehicle, comprising: a frame; a drive system coupled to the frame to propel and steer the vehicle; an energy storage device configured to provide power to the drive system; (¶49)
a lift implement coupled to the frame, the lift implement comprising a cradle and a lift assembly configured to adjust a position of the cradle relative to the frame; (¶36, 46)
and a controller comprising one or more memory devices having instructions stored thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: determine a condition of the vehicle. (¶25, 36, 45-46, 49)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Whikehart with a lift implement coupled to the frame, the lift implement comprising a cradle and a lift assembly configured to adjust a position of the cradle relative to the frame as taught by Beach with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 2, Whikehart further discloses wherein the determined condition is at least one of: a pairing condition, wherein the vehicle is paired with a second vehicle such that movement of the vehicle and the second vehicle is coordinated; a power condition based on a state of the energy storage device; a fault condition; a load condition, wherein the vehicle is supporting a load via the cradle; or a movement condition, wherein the movement condition represents at least one of a direction of travel of the vehicle or a path of the vehicle. (¶31, 33, 36)
Regarding claim 3, Whikehart further discloses wherein the determined condition is the pairing condition. (¶122) Alternatively obvious to a person or ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing as a notification when pairing devices (e.g. via Bluetooth) is a well-known feature. See also Beach Fig 5, ¶46.
Regarding claim 4, Whikehart further discloses wherein the determined condition is the power condition, and wherein the state of the energy storage device is at least one of a state of charge, a charging state, or a discharging state. (¶33, 49)
Regarding claim 5, Whikehart further discloses wherein the determined condition is the fault condition. (¶7)
Regarding claim 6, Beach teaches wherein the determined condition is the load condition. (Fig 5; ¶46)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Whikehart with wherein the determined condition is the load condition as taught by Beach with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 7, Beach teaches wherein in the load condition the vehicle is coupled to the load via the lift implement. (¶46)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Whikehart with wherein in the load condition the vehicle is coupled to the load via the lift implement as taught by Beach with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 8, Whikehart further discloses wherein the determined condition is the movement condition. (¶36)
Regarding claim 9, Whikehart further discloses wherein the movement condition represents the path of the vehicle. (¶36)
Regarding claim 10, Whikehart further discloses wherein each condition of the plurality of conditions is associated with a type, and wherein the unique alerts associated with each condition of the same type share at least one common feature. (¶23-25, 28)
Regarding claim 11, Whikehart further discloses wherein the unique alerts comprise a visual alert and an audible alert, and wherein at least one common feature is at least one of the visual alert of the audible alert. (¶28)
Regarding claim 12, wherein the alert comprises a visual alert and the at least one common feature is a color. (¶28)
Claims 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et. al. (US Patent Publication 2018/0129220) in view of Singh et. al. (US Patent Publication 2022/0214170).
Regarding claim 13, Beach discloses a vehicle, comprising: a frame; a drive system coupled to the frame to propel and steer the vehicle; an energy storage device configured to provide power to the drive system; a lift implement coupled to the frame, the lift implement comprising a cradle and a lift assembly configured to adjust a position of the cradle relative to the frame; (¶36, 49)
one or more sensors configured to provide sensing data indicative of an environment surrounding the vehicle; and (¶41)
a controller comprising one or more memory devices having instructions stored thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive first sensing data from the one or more sensors; receive second sensing data from at least one external sensor communicably coupled to the vehicle, (¶38, 40)
Beach appears to be silent as to generate a map of an area surrounding the vehicle based on the first sensing data and the second sensing data.
Singh however teaches generate a map of an area surrounding the vehicle based on the first sensing data and the second sensing data. (Fig 1; ¶18, 20, 22-24)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with generate a map of an area surrounding the vehicle based on the first sensing data and the second sensing data as taught by Singh with a reasonable expectation of success because Beach discloses that “ sensor[s] are also necessary to find loads that are located at an approximate location.” That is a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that it would be obvious to accurately map the location of the loads; and further because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 14, Singh teaches wherein the one or more sensors have a first field of view and the external sensor has a second field of view different than the first field of view. (¶19)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with wherein the one or more sensors have a first field of view and the external sensor has a second field of view different than the first field of view as taught by Singh with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 15, Singh teaches wherein the external sensor is positioned off-board of the vehicle. (¶19)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with wherein the external sensor is positioned off-board of the vehicle as taught by Singh with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 16, Singh teaches wherein the external sensor is coupled to a second vehicle. (¶16)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with wherein the external sensor is coupled to a second vehicle as taught by Singh with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 17, Singh teaches wherein the vehicle is coupled to the external sensor via a local area network established as least partially by the vehicle and the external sensor. (¶24, 58)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with wherein the vehicle is coupled to the external sensor via a local area network established as least partially by the vehicle and the external sensor as taught by Singh with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach in view of Singh as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Whikehart et. al. (US Patent Publication 2020/0377113).
Regarding claim 18, Whikehart teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the one or more processors to provide an alert, via at least one audio output device or visual output device based on a condition of the vehicle, wherein the condition is at least one of a plurality of conditions, and wherein each condition of the plurality of conditions is associated with a unique alert, the unique alert comprising at least one unique aspect specific to the condition relative to the other conditions of the plurality of conditions. (¶23-31, 33, 48-52, 81)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the one or more processors to provide an alert, via at least one audio output device or visual output device based on a condition of the vehicle, wherein the condition is at least one of a plurality of conditions, and wherein each condition of the plurality of conditions is associated with a unique alert, the unique alert comprising at least one unique aspect specific to the condition relative to the other conditions of the plurality of conditions as taught by Whikehart with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 19, Beach discloses a system, comprising: a first vehicle and a second vehicle, wherein each of the first vehicle and the second vehicle comprise: a frame; a drive system coupled to the frame to propel and steer the vehicle; an energy storage device configured to provide power to the drive system; a lift implement coupled to the frame, the lift implement comprising a cradle and a lift assembly configured to adjust a position of the cradle relative to the frame; and one or more sensors configured to provide first sensing data indicative of a first area surrounding the vehicle; an external sensor offboard the first vehicle and the second vehicle, wherein the external sensor comprises one or more sensors configured to provide second sensing data indicative of second area surrounding the external sensor; and a controller coupled to the first vehicle, the second vehicle, and the external sensor. (Fig 5; ¶36, 46, 49)
Beach appears to be silent as to the controller comprising one or more memory devices having instructions stored thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive the first sensing data from the first vehicle and the second vehicle indicative of a first area surrounding the first vehicle and the second vehicle; receive the second sensing data from the external sensor indicative of the second area surrounding the external sensor, wherein the first area and the second area at least partially overlap; and generate a map based on the first sensing data and the second sensing data.
Singh however teaches an external sensor offboard the first vehicle and the second vehicle, wherein the external sensor comprises one or more sensors configured to provide second sensing data indicative of second area surrounding the external sensor; and a controller coupled to the first vehicle, the second vehicle, and the external sensor, the controller comprising one or more memory devices having instructions stored thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive the first sensing data from the first vehicle and the second vehicle indicative of a first area surrounding the first vehicle and the second vehicle; receive the second sensing data from the external sensor indicative of the second area surrounding the external sensor, wherein the first area and the second area at least partially overlap; and generate a map based on the first sensing data and the second sensing data. (Fig 1; ¶18-23, 35)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with the controller comprising one or more memory devices having instructions stored thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive the first sensing data from the first vehicle and the second vehicle indicative of a first area surrounding the first vehicle and the second vehicle; receive the second sensing data from the external sensor indicative of the second area surrounding the external sensor, wherein the first area and the second area at least partially overlap; and generate a map based on the first sensing data and the second sensing data as taught by Whikehart with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 20, Singh further teaches wherein the at least a portion of the second area does not overlap with the first area. (¶19)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Beach with wherein the at least a portion of the second area does not overlap with the first area as taught by Whikehart with a reasonable expectation of success because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN D HUTCHINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8413. The examiner can normally be reached 7-5 Mon-Thur.
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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/ALAN D HUTCHINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights