DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office action on the merits. Claims 1-6, 22-23, 26, 31-36 are currently pending and addressed below.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 04/24/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. While a partial translation has been provided for the International Search Report, no translation has been provided for the Written Opinion issued in PCT/JP2023/037596. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to in lined through documents has not been considered.
Title of the Invention
37 C.F.R. 1.72(a) states: “The title of the invention may not exceed 500 characters in length and must be as short and specific as possible” (emphasis added). Thus, the title of the invention is not sufficiently descriptive.
A new title is required that is more clearly and more specifically indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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)(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, 3-4, 31-32, and 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Inoue et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0134047 A1 (hereinafter Inoue).
Regarding claim 1, Inoue discloses an information processing apparatus (Inoue Fig. 3) comprising:
a processor configured to calculate a control variable for controlling an operation of a forklift based on detection information detected by a sensor mounted on the forklift (see at least Inoue [0212]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35.”; [0131]-[0132]: “The position information acquisition unit 17a senses the position of the load 31 on the object determined to be the transport platform 30. The orientation information acquisition unit 17b senses the orientation of the load 31 with respect to the object determined to be the transport platform 30.”; Inoue discloses a control variable is at least an amount of extension of each arm);
and control the operation of the forklift based on the control variable (see at least Inoue [0212]-[0213]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35. The forklift 20 then travels toward the transport platform 30 so that the arm portions 24 are received in the holes 30b. The arm portions 24 are raised while inserted in the holes 30b, and the transport platform 30 and the load 31 are supported and lifted by the arm portions 24. Moving the forklift 20 in this state allows the transport platform 30 and the load 31 to be moved to the desired location.”).
Regarding claim 3, Inoue discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to:
determine control information to be used for calculation of the control variable for each operation of the forklift from the acquirable detection information (see at least Inoue [0198]-[0205]: “Consequently, step S40 includes four types of determination processing: processing to determine whether the position condition is met (S41), processing to determine whether the orientation condition is met (S42), processing to determine whether the shape condition is met (S43), and processing to determine whether the height condition (S44) is met. The position condition of step S41 is a condition that the relative position of the object Q (load 31) with respect to the object P (transport platform 30) calculated in step S34 be located within a predetermined reference area…The height condition of step S44 is a condition that the height of the object Q (load 31) calculated in step S33 be equal to or less than a predetermined reference height.”; [0212]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35.”);
and calculate the control variable to control the operation of the forklift based on the control information (see at least Inoue [0212]-[0213]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35. The forklift 20 then travels toward the transport platform 30 so that the arm portions 24 are received in the holes 30b. The arm portions 24 are raised while inserted in the holes 30b, and the transport platform 30 and the load 31 are supported and lifted by the arm portions 24. Moving the forklift 20 in this state allows the transport platform 30 and the load 31 to be moved to the desired location.”).
Regarding claim 4, Inoue discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the processor calculates the control variable for controlling extension and retraction of a fork that is provided in the forklift and is extendable and retractable in a front-rear direction, as the operation of the forklift based on the detection information (see at least Inoue [0212]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35.”; [0092]: “The arm portions 24 are, for example, two claw-shaped members extending forward.”),
and the processor controls extension and retraction of the fork based on the control variable (see at least Inoue [0212]-[0213]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35. The forklift 20 then travels toward the transport platform 30 so that the arm portions 24 are received in the holes 30b. The arm portions 24 are raised while inserted in the holes 30b, and the transport platform 30 and the load 31 are supported and lifted by the arm portions 24. Moving the forklift 20 in this state allows the transport platform 30 and the load 31 to be moved to the desired location.”).
Regarding claim 31, Inoue discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to function as the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 (see at least Inoue [0231]: “For example, the present invention may be realized as a program that causes a computer to execute the transport possibility determination method described above”).
Regarding claim 32, Inoue discloses a forklift (Inoue Fig. 1) comprising:
a guide that extends in an up-down direction; a plurality of forks that are movable in the up-down direction for each area of a height of the guide and are capable of extending and retracting a part on which a cargo is placed, in a front-rear direction with respect to the guide (see at least Inoue [0092]: “The drive unit 23 is provided in front of the vehicle body portion 21. The drive unit 23 drives the arm portions 24 up and down or in the tilt direction according to operation of the control lever by the driver. The arm portions 24 are inserted into holes (receiving portions) 30b or the like provided to the transport platform 30 to support the transport platform 30.”; [0212]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35.”; [0092]: “The arm portions 24 are, for example, two claw-shaped members extending forward.”);
a sensor mounted on the forklift (see at least Inoue [0015]: “The distance information acquisition unit may be configured to calculate distance information by detecting the reflection of electromagnetic waves, or may be configured to acquire distance information from a distance sensor or the like provided as an external device, for example.”);
and a processor that controls vertical movement and extension/retraction of the plurality of forks based on the information detected by the sensor (see at least Inoue [0095]: “The arm control unit 25 b controls the lifting of the arm portions 24 according to the amount of operation of an operating lever (not shown) installed in the driver's seat provided to the vehicle body portion 21. Also, the arm control unit 25 b may perform control so that the spacing of the two arm portions 24 is automatically adjusted to match the sensed position of the holes 30 b in the transport platform 30 according to the detection result of the transport platform 30 (discussed below). Accordingly, the forklift 20 may include a spacing adjustment mechanism for adjusting the spacing of the arm portions 24. The forklift 20 may also be provided with a telescopic adjustment mechanism that independently adjusts the amount of extension of the left and right arms.”).
Regarding claim 35, Inoue discloses the forklift according to claim 32,
wherein the processor performs autonomous traveling based on information detected by the sensor (see at least Inoue [0088]: “The forklift 20 may be an autonomous transport device that does not need to be driven by a driver. In this case, autonomous operation is carried out on the basis of the results of detection of the transport platform 30 and the state of the load 31 on the transport platform 30 by the transport possibility determination device 10.”).
Regarding claim 36, Inoue discloses the forklift according to claim 35,
wherein the processor controls each of the forks based on a gravity center position of the forklift (see at least Inoue [0212]-[0215]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35…The amount of extension and retraction of the arm portions is adjusted on the basis of the position and orientation of the load 31. Accordingly, even if the center of gravity of the transport platform 30 and the load 31 is offset from the center of the transport platform 30, the transport platform 30 and the load 31 can still be lifted stably”).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Zeitler et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0028323 A1 (hereinafter Zeitler).
Regarding claim 2, Inoue discloses all elements of the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 as explained above. Inoue fails to expressly disclose controlling operation in units of one-billionth of a second. However, Zeitler teaches
wherein the processor controls the operation of the forklift in units of one-billionth of a second based on the control variable (see at least Zeitler [0037]: “For example, if beacon 54a in FIG. 4 emits a pulse that takes 5 nanoseconds to travel to transceiver 46a, then a distance 31a between transceiver 46a and beacon 54a can be computed by multiplying the propagation speed of the pulse by the time-of-flight.”; [0058]: “Beacons 54 could also be placed on individual AGVs, other mobile vehicles in the facility--such as driver-guided fork-lift trucks--or on stationary objects, in order to avoid collisions with these objects. By being able to determine its location with respect to beacons 54, vehicles 20 steer themselves accordingly to avoid collisions with certain designated beacons, such as those on fork-lift trucks or at other occupied locations. When vehicle 20 detects that it is within a certain vicinity of a beacon 54 that it should avoid, such as one on a fork-lift truck, a controller on vehicle 20 implements an appropriate velocity change to help avoid a collision with the fork-lift truck.”; examiner notes one-billionth of a second is equal to a nanosecond).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the apparatus disclosed by Inoue with Zeitler with reasonable expectation of success. Zeitler is directed towards the related field of a material handling system. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue with Zeitler to improve guidance for material handling vehicles (see at least Zeitler [0011]: “Accordingly, the present invention provides improved material handling methods that overcome the aforementioned disadvantages, as well as others…The use of these types of transmitters and receivers eases the installation of the material handling systems, enhances the ability of the particular types of material handling systems to determine position, and allows for improved guidance of the material handling vehicles.”).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Zhang et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0100195 A1 (hereinafter Zhang), and further in view of Meijer, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0331735 A1.
Regarding claim 5, Inoue discloses all elements of the information processing apparatus according to claim 4 as explained above. Inoue fails to expressly disclose calculating the control variable based on detection information from sensors mounted on each fork and the sensors have detected a common range. However, Zhang teaches
the sensor is mounted on each of the plurality of forks, and the processor calculates the control variable based on the detection information in which a plurality of the sensors have detected a common range (see at least Zhang [0101]: “In this embodiment, each fork 30 includes at least one sensor (scanner) 40, or fork tip scanner 40. The fork tip scanners 40 can be configured to produce overlapping scanning planes 1102, 1104, which can be used to detect a pallet P. In this embodiment, each scanner produces a scanning plane with a sweep of 108 degrees…In some embodiments, scanners on both forks have the same scan sweep, but in other embodiments they can have different scan sweeps.”; [0026]: “In various embodiments, in response to identifying at least one pallet and determining an orientation of the at least one pallet, the at least one processor is configured to signal to the drive system to cause the transport system to navigate to align the plurality of forks with the at least one pallet.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the apparatus disclosed by Inoue with Zhang with reasonable expectation of success. Zhang is directed towards the related field of a vehicle object-engagement scanning system for warehouse vehicles. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue with Zhang to improve accurate pallet identification and object engagement (see at least Zhang [0011]: “It would be useful to have sensing capability on pallet trucks or other vehicles that enables accurate pallet identification and engagement by the fork tips, or engagement of other types of objects of interest by other types of object engagement apparatuses of a vehicle.”).
Inoue in view of Zhang fail to expressly disclose overlapping a plurality of forks. However, Meijer teaches
in the fork configured by overlapping a plurality of forks (see at least Meijer [0052]: “In an alternative embodiment fork 72 (FIG. 3) is provided with modular sliding fork 74 provided with nose 76, carrying surface 78 and sides 80. Fixed fork part 84 is provided with horizontal part 86, vertical part 88 and transition part 90. Further provided are hooks 92. A locking mechanism is preferably also arranged in this embodiment, as is drive 94 for extension/shortening of fork 72.”; [0065]: “Fork-lift truck 202 (FIG. 9) is provided with cab 204, frame 206 and wheels 208, mast construction 210 with construction 212 provided with guides 214 in which or on which fork board 216 is arranged. Arranged on fork board 216 in the shown embodiments are forks 2, 32, 72 provided with respective modular sliding forks 4, 34, 74 and fixed fork parts 14, 44, 84.”; Meijer Fig. 3 shows sliding fork 74 overlaps fixed fork 84)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the apparatus disclosed by Inoue in view of Zhang with the overlapping forks taught by Meijer with reasonable expectation of success. Meijer is directed towards the related field of a modular sliding fork for a forklift. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application that a specific forklift configuration can include a modular sliding fork or multi-stage fork. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue in view of Meijer to adjust the fork length depending on the load dimensions (see at least Meijer [0011]: “By providing the modular sliding fork slidably relative to a (fixed) fork part of a fork-lift truck or pallet truck the effective fork length can be adjusted. The length can hereby be adapted to the load to be displaced, for instance to the dimensions of one of the different (standard) types of pallet. This reduces the risk of damage during picking up, setting down and/or manoeuvring of the load. The safety risk in respect of other persons is also reduced.”).
Regarding claim 6, Inoue discloses all elements of the information processing apparatus according to claim 4 as explained above. Inoue fails to expressly disclose calculating the control variable based on detection information from sensors mounted on each fork and the sensors have detected different ranges. However, Zhang teaches
the sensor is mounted on each of the plurality of forks, and the processor calculates the control variable based on the detection information in which a plurality of the sensors have detected different ranges (see at least Zhang [0101]: “In this embodiment, each fork 30 includes at least one sensor (scanner) 40, or fork tip scanner 40. The fork tip scanners 40 can be configured to produce overlapping scanning planes 1102, 1104, which can be used to detect a pallet P…In other embodiments, the scan sweep can be different. In some embodiments, scanners on both forks have the same scan sweep, but in other embodiments they can have different scan sweeps.”; [0026]: “In various embodiments, in response to identifying at least one pallet and determining an orientation of the at least one pallet, the at least one processor is configured to signal to the drive system to cause the transport system to navigate to align the plurality of forks with the at least one pallet.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the apparatus disclosed by Inoue with Zhang with reasonable expectation of success. Zhang is directed towards the related field of a vehicle object-engagement scanning system for warehouse vehicles. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue with Zhang to improve accurate pallet identification and object engagement (see at least Zhang [0011]: “It would be useful to have sensing capability on pallet trucks or other vehicles that enables accurate pallet identification and engagement by the fork tips, or engagement of other types of objects of interest by other types of object engagement apparatuses of a vehicle.”).
Inoue in view of Zhang fail to expressly disclose overlapping a plurality of forks. However, Meijer teaches
in the fork configured by overlapping a plurality of forks (see at least Meijer [0052]: “In an alternative embodiment fork 72 (FIG. 3) is provided with modular sliding fork 74 provided with nose 76, carrying surface 78 and sides 80. Fixed fork part 84 is provided with horizontal part 86, vertical part 88 and transition part 90. Further provided are hooks 92. A locking mechanism is preferably also arranged in this embodiment, as is drive 94 for extension/shortening of fork 72.”; [0065]: “Fork-lift truck 202 (FIG. 9) is provided with cab 204, frame 206 and wheels 208, mast construction 210 with construction 212 provided with guides 214 in which or on which fork board 216 is arranged. Arranged on fork board 216 in the shown embodiments are forks 2, 32, 72 provided with respective modular sliding forks 4, 34, 74 and fixed fork parts 14, 44, 84.”; Meijer Fig. 3 shows sliding fork 74 overlaps fixed fork 84)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the apparatus disclosed by Inoue in view of Zhang with the overlapping forks taught by Meijer with reasonable expectation of success. Meijer is directed towards the related field of a modular sliding fork for a forklift. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application that a specific forklift configuration can include a modular sliding fork or multi-stage fork. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue in view of Meijer to adjust the fork length depending on the load dimensions (see at least Meijer [0011]: “By providing the modular sliding fork slidably relative to a (fixed) fork part of a fork-lift truck or pallet truck the effective fork length can be adjusted. The length can hereby be adapted to the load to be displaced, for instance to the dimensions of one of the different (standard) types of pallet. This reduces the risk of damage during picking up, setting down and/or manoeuvring of the load. The safety risk in respect of other persons is also reduced.”).
Claims 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Raninen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0093796 A1 (hereinafter Raninen).
Regarding claim 22, Inoue discloses all elements of the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 as explained above. Inoue fails to expressly disclose controlling a height of a guard provided on a platform on which a cargo is placed in the forklift. However, Raninen teaches
wherein the processor controls a height of a guard provided on at least one of four sides of a platform on which a cargo is placed in the forklift (see at least Raninen [0019]: “The detents 13 are pivotably attached to the lifting tunnels 12 so as to be rotated between a deployed configuration and a released configuration. In the deployed configuration as shown in FIG. 2 the detent 13 extends in the longitudinal direction of the adaptor pallet 10 along the lifting tunnel 12, wherein the upwardly extending tab of the detent 13 at the loading end 16 of the adaptor pallet 10 creates a sill for the wheeled load carrier 20 thus preventing the wheeled load carrier 20 from rolling off the adaptor pallet 10.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the apparatus disclosed by Inoue with Raninen with reasonable expectation of success. Raninen is directed towards the related field of transporting wheeled load carriers on a pallet and a corresponding logistics system. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue with Raninen to transport multiple cargo at a time while securing the carriers (see at least Raninen [0002]-[0003]: “While the wheeled load carriers may be moved about by hand, there is also a need to transport a plurality of wheeled load carriers at once. Such a need occurs e.g. when loading or unloading a trailer or a lorry. If a trailer is loaded one wheeled load carrier at a time, the long duration of the operation consumes valuable docking time not to mention inflicted gratuitous vehicle idle time. Also, when transported individually, the wheeled load carriers require thorough and tedious trussing up to prevent unintended movement within the load space…There is also a need to secure the load carriers to the adaptor pallet.”)
Regarding claim 23, Inoue in view of Raninen teach all elements of the information processing apparatus according to claim 22 as explained above. Raninen further teaches
wherein processor raises the guard in accordance with an increase in acceleration during traveling of the forklift (see at least Raninen [0019]: “The detents 13 are pivotably attached to the lifting tunnels 12 so as to be rotated between a deployed configuration and a released configuration. In the deployed configuration as shown in FIG. 2 the detent 13 extends in the longitudinal direction of the adaptor pallet 10 along the lifting tunnel 12, wherein the upwardly extending tab of the detent 13 at the loading end 16 of the adaptor pallet 10 creates a sill for the wheeled load carrier 20 thus preventing the wheeled load carrier 20 from rolling off the adaptor pallet 10.”; [0022]: “As the male counterpart 15 extends through the chassis 21 of the wheeled load carrier 20 along the tracks 11, the end of the wheeled load carrier 20 is prevented from lifting from the adaptor pallet 10, when the logistics system 100 is subjected to acceleration during heavy braking on a forklift, for example.”; Raninen [0025] teaches the detents are released during loading of the cargo, and the detents are deployed and locked during transportation which corresponds to an increase in acceleration from the stationary state).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Hasegawa et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0294349 A1 (hereinafter Hasegawa).
Regarding claim 26, Inoue discloses all elements of the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 as explained above. Inoue further discloses
the processor calculates the control variable for controlling the operation of the forklift…based on the detection information detected by the sensor mounted on the forklift including the guide and the fork (see at least Inoue [0212]: “Furthermore, the amount of extension of each of the arm portions 24 is adjusted on the basis of the position condition and orientation condition calculated in steps S34 and S35.”; [0131]-[0132]: “The position information acquisition unit 17a senses the position of the load 31 on the object determined to be the transport platform 30. The orientation information acquisition unit 17b senses the orientation of the load 31 with respect to the object determined to be the transport platform 30.”; [0109]: “The transport possibility determination device 10 of this embodiment is provided to the distance measurement device 1 attached to the upper part of the drive unit 23 as shown in FIGS. 1 and 3 . The transport possibility determination device 10 detects a transport platform 30 to be transported by the forklift 20, and also detects the state (position, range, height, balance, etc.) of the load 31 placed on the transport platform 30.”)
Inoue fails to expressly disclose rotation of a fork in a right-left direction with respect to a guide in an up-down direction. However, Hasegawa teaches
including rotation of a fork that is rotatable in a right-left direction with respect to a guide that extends in an up-down direction (see at least Hasegawa [0039]: “The material handling mechanism 102 including these components can lift, rotate, and shift, as illustrated in FIG. 2 in response to a command from the computation device 104, and can turn the fork 102f about 180 degrees to the left and right with respect to the travel direction as illustrated in FIG. 3.”)
and the processor controls the operation of the forklift including the rotation of the fork based on the control variable (see at least Hasegawa [0039]: “The material handling mechanism 102 including these components can lift, rotate, and shift, as illustrated in FIG. 2 in response to a command from the computation device 104, and can turn the fork 102f about 180 degrees to the left and right with respect to the travel direction as illustrated in FIG. 3.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the apparatus disclosed by Inoue with the rotation taught by Hasegawa with reasonable expectation of success. Hasegawa is directed towards the related field of an autonomous material handling vehicle. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue with Hasegawa to improve efficiency (see at least Hasegawa [0013]: “A computation device, a vehicle, a material handling system, a computation method, and a program, according to embodiments of the present disclosure can realize efficient material handling work.”).
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Knapik, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0034152 A1.
Regarding claim 33, Inoue discloses all elements of the forklift according to claim 32 as explained above. Inoue fails to expressly disclose forks on each of a front surface and a rear surface of the guide. However, Knapik teaches
wherein one or a plurality of the forks are provided on each of a front surface and a rear surface of the guide (see at least Knapik [0047]: “There are two linear carriages 502 a and 502 b mounted to the front and back of the fork guides 501 a and 501 b, and these linear carriages 502 a and 502 b are movably attached to two linear rails 503 a and 503 b.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the forklift disclosed by Inoue with Knapik with reasonable expectation of success. Knapik is directed towards the related field of forklifts and a quick connect mechanism. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue with Knapik to easily and quickly attach forklifts to trailers (see at least Knapik [0005]: “More specifically, the invention relates to a quick connect mechanism to allow a logistics trailer to be easily and quickly attached to a forklift or other lifting vehicle for towing, as well as with other logistics trailers to create a train of trailers that can be towed by a forklift.”).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Whitfield, Jr. et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0355335 A1 (hereinafter Whitfield).
Regarding claim 34, Inoue discloses all elements of the forklift according to claim 32 as explained above. Inoue fails to expressly disclose detecting weight of the cargo and controlling the forks based on a placement order or an unloading order of the cargos in accordance with the weight. However, Whitfield teaches wherein
the sensor detects information regarding a weight of each of the cargos placed on each of the forks (see at least Whitfield [0058]: “In some embodiments, the plurality of sensors 108 includes at least one weight sensor 228 as illustrated in FIG. 5. The weight sensor 228 may include, but is not limited to, axle based or chassis mounted load cells or strain gauges attached to the lift arm assembly 12 and the fork mechanism 18.”),
and the processor controls the plurality of forks based on at least one of a placement order or an unloading order of the cargos with respect to the plurality of forks determined in accordance with the weight of each of the cargos (see at least Whitfield [0058]: “The control module 104 selectively controls the lift arm assembly 12, the fork mechanism 18, and the compaction mechanism 20 based on the sensed weight values, the sensed position values, the dump cycle counter, and the packing profile in order to achieve the highest pack density and even load distribution.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation a packing profile includes a placement order).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the forklift disclosed by Inoue with Whitfield with reasonable expectation of success. Whitfield is directed towards the related field of an automatically controlled front end loader. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Inoue with Whitfield to increase vehicle automation and efficiency (see at least Whitfield [0004]: “With a continuing need to increase vehicle operator efficiency, there has been a growing trend to optimize operations within the refuse vehicle. For example, an operator may manually operate a front end loader in order to lift and empty residential refuse container. The operator may have to traverse obstacles such as power lines and trees. The operator may further have to monitor the capacity of the refuse truck hopper. Accordingly, a system designed to increase automation to retrieve residential refuse is desirable.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yamaguchi, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0083936 A1, directed towards performing lifting control of a forklift based on heights of cargo and loadable heights of a truck.
Shigemasa et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0382703 A1, directed towards determining forklift height lower limit and upper limit values based on a pallet tier.
Takao, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0348247 A1, directed towards operating a forklift based on a transport order of a pallet and adjacent object.
Kato et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0242386 A1, directed towards a forklift lowering and tilting process based on the tilt angle.
Sukalski et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0340404 A1, directed towards a forklift sensor scale.
Kobel et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0227612 A1, directed towards calculating a forklift elevation based on pressure sensor comparison.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J SLOWIK whose telephone number is (571)270-5608. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI: 0900-1700.
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, ANISS CHAD can be reached at (571)270-3832. 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.
/ELIZABETH J SLOWIK/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/CHRISTOPHER GEORGE FEES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights