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 .
Response to Amendment and Arguments
The amendment filed 8/25/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-6 remain pending in the application. Amendments overcome the previous rejections under 35 USC 112. The previous rejection(s) are withdrawn. Claims no longer invoke interpretation under 35 USC 112(f).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US20200240114A1 (“Yamamoto”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20130073151A1 (“Wada”) in view of US20200240114A1 (“Yamamoto”).
As per claims 1 and 6, Wada teaches the limitations of the work machine and control method:
A work machine comprising: a work machine body configured to travel; a work implement attached to the work machine body; a hydraulic cylinder configured to drive the work implement; an on-off valve disposed between the hydraulic cylinder and an accumulator; the accumulator being connected to the hydraulic cylinder via the on-off valve and configured to damp vibration of the work implement when the on-off valve is in an open state; a controller including a processor and a memory configured to store a program, the processor being configured, according to the program, to control the on-off valve based on [sensor data]. (Wada at least the abstract, FIG. 3, [0037], [0041], [0077], [0082-0083], [0030], [0009])
Wada does not disclose, which Yamamoto teaches: a vibration information detection sensor configured to detect information regarding vibration of the work machine body; and a controller including a processor and a memory configured to store a program, the processor being configured, according to the program, to control the on-off valve based on the information regarding vibration detected by the vibration information detection sensor. (Yamamoto at least [0126], abstract, FIG. 14)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wada with the aforementioned limitations taught by Yamamoto with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to improve the operability and efficiency of a work machine (Yamamoto [0065]).
As per claim 2, Wada in combination with the other reference teaches the limitations of the invention as described above. Wada additionally teaches:
the controller is configured to switch the on-off valve between a first state in the on-off valve is in the open state and the accumulator damps vibration of the work implement and a second state in which the on-off valve is in a closed state and the accumulator does not damp vibration of the work implement, and the controller is configured to switch the on-off valve to the first state upon determining [movement of the work machine based on sensor data]. (Wada at least the abstract, [0009-0011], [0054])
Wada does not disclose, which Yamamoto teaches:
the controller is configured to switch the damping unit to the first state upon determining that the work machine body is vibrating based on the information regarding vibration. (Yamamoto at least [0126], abstract, FIG. 14)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wada with the aforementioned limitations taught by Yamamoto with a reasonable expectation of success. In addition to the motivation to combine these references, as described above, one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to keep the on/off valve of Wada instead of using the proportional valve of Yamamoto to simplify the controller hardware and software to use open loop requirements.
As per claim 4, Wada in combination with the other reference teaches the limitations of the invention as described above. Wada does not disclose, which Yamamoto teaches:
the information regarding vibration is acceleration generated in the work machine body, and the controller is configured to determine that the work machine body is vibrating when at least one of an amplitude of the acceleration being larger than a first predetermined threshold and a frequency of the acceleration being larger than a second predetermined threshold is satisfied. (Yamamoto at least [0075], [0102], [0126])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wada with the aforementioned limitations taught by Yamamoto with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to improve the operability and efficiency of a work machine (Yamamoto [0065]).
As per claim 5, Wada in combination with the other reference teaches the limitations of the invention as described above. Wada does not disclose, which Yamamoto teaches:
the information regarding vibration is a pitch angle generated in the work machine body, and the controller is configured to determine that the work machine body is vibrating when at least one of an amplitude of the pitch angle being larger than a first predetermined threshold and a frequency of the pitch angle being larger than a second predetermined threshold is satisfied. (Yamamoto at least [0075], [0102], [0126])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wada with the aforementioned limitations taught by Yamamoto with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to improve the operability and efficiency of a work machine (Yamamoto [0065]).
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 OLIVER TAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4728. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-7.
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.
/O.T./ Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights