DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(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 1-21 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1-3, 9-10, 13-14, 17 and 19 (for example claim 1 Ln 8) states the term "gradually” (for example: “gradually increase the input current value”). This term is an example of relative terminology (MPEP 2173.05(b)). Although, the use of relative terminology is not necessarily indefinite, it is found to be indefinite in these claims. The claims are indefinite because the specification fails to provide examples or teachings that can be used to measure a degree even without a precise numerical measurement (e.g., a figure that provides a standard for measuring the meaning of the term of degree. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate.
Claims 2-3 and 9-10 (for example claim 2 Ln 2) states the term "quickly” (for example: “quickly increase the input current value”). This term is an example of relative terminology (MPEP 2173.05(b)). Although, the use of relative terminology is not necessarily indefinite, it is found to be indefinite in these claims. The claims are indefinite because the specification fails to provide examples or teachings that can be used to measure a degree even without a precise numerical measurement (e.g., a figure that provides a standard for measuring the meaning of the term of degree. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate.
Claim 1 Ln 4-5 states the limitation "a controller configured or programmed to control an opening of the control valve by changing an input current value input to the control valve”. When taken in light of the specification, it is unclear how the controller is configured to control the opening of the control valve by inputting the input current value to the control valve. The drawings depict, and the specification states that the controller does not control the opening of the control valve by inputting the input current value to the control valve. Instead, what the drawings depict, and the specification states is that the controller inputs the input current value to an auxiliary solenoid control valve which controls an opening thereof. The opening amount of the auxiliary solenoid control valve controls a pilot pressure corresponding to the opening amount. The pilot pressure, subsequently, controls the opening of the control valve. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate. For examination, the limitation was interpreted as --a controller configured or programmed to control an opening of the control valve by changing an input current value
Claims 4-8, 11-12, 15-16, 18 and 20-21 are rejected for depending upon at least claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
-(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
-(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by OKA; Daisuke et al. US 20190292753 A1, hereinafter Oka.
Regarding claim 1, Oka discloses (Fig. 1-6), as far as is determinate, a hydraulic system comprising:
a control valve (5) to adjust a flow rate and a pressure of hydraulic fluid [0036, 0050-0051] supplied to a hydraulic actuator (60) to actuate an attachment (“crusher or a breaker”) attached to a working machine [0037]; and
a controller (70/71) configured or programmed to control an opening of the control valve by changing an input current value
wherein the controller is configured or programmed to, in activating or stopping the attachment by changing the input current value to a target current value corresponding to a target opening of the control valve, gradually change the input current value in a ramp manner in a first current range in which the attachment is actuated ([0053, 0059, 0065, 0075] discloses, during activating/actuating the attachment, changing the input current value from its existing/current value to a target value in accordance with the attachment type such that the control valve is opened in a desired/anticipated manner for that particular attachment; Fig. 3-6 depict the current value increasing in ramp manner within a depicted range depending upon attachment).
Regarding claim 21, Oka discloses (Fig. 1-6) a working machine (300) comprising: a linkage (302) to link an attachment (308) [0032]thereto; and the hydraulic system (Fig. 2) according to claim 1
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, Oka discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1 except fails to explicitly state that the controller is configured or programmed to, in activating the attachment, quickly increase the input current value in a step manner to a first current value within a second current range in which the attachment is not actuated, and gradually increase the input current value in a ramp manner from the first current value to a second current value which is the target current value.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claim 2 contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed controller configuration. Although Oka discloses a controller configuration for activating the attachment, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Oka to incorporate the details of the controller is configured or programmed to, in activating the attachment, quickly increase the input current value in a step manner to a first current value within a second current range in which the attachment is not actuated, and gradually increase the input current value in a ramp manner from the first current value to a second current value which is the target current value, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 9, Oka discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1 except fails to explicitly state that the controller is configured or programmed to, in stopping the attachment, gradually reduce the input current value in a ramp manner to a third current value within a second current range in which the attachment is not actuated, and quickly reduce the input current value in a step manner from the third current value to a fourth current value which is the target current value.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claim 9 contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed controller configuration. Although Oka discloses a controller configuration for activating the attachment, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Oka to incorporate the details of the controller is configured or programmed to, in stopping the attachment, gradually reduce the input current value in a ramp manner to a third current value within a second current range in which the attachment is not actuated, and quickly reduce the input current value in a step manner from the third current value to a fourth current value which is the target current value, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 14, Oka discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1. Oka further discloses the system further comprising: a second input interface (70) to receive input of attachment information relating to the attachment attached to the working machine [0062].
Oka fails to explicitly state that the controller is configured or programmed to change at least one of (i) a change time taken for the input current value to reach the target current value or (ii) an amount of current change per unit time when the input current value gradually changes in a ramp manner, based on the attachment information input via the second input interface.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claim 14 contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed controller configuration. Although Oka discloses a controller configuration for activating the attachment, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Oka to incorporate the details of the controller is configured or programmed to change at least one of (i) a change time taken for the input current value to reach the target current value or (ii) an amount of current change per unit time when the input current value gradually changes in a ramp manner, based on the attachment information input via the second input interface, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 17, Oka discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1. Oka further discloses the system further comprising: a prime mover (fundamentally, the system requires a form of rotation power to drive various pumps); a hydraulic pump (2) to deliver hydraulic fluid using power output from the prime mover [0034].
Oka fails to explicitly state that the system further comprising: a rotation speed detector to detect a rotation speed of the prime mover; wherein the controller is configured or programmed to, in activating or stopping the attachment, change an amount of current change per unit time when the input current value gradually changes in a ramp manner, in accordance with the rotation speed of the prime mover detected by the rotation speed detector.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claim 17 contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed controller configuration. Although Oka discloses a controller configuration for activating the attachment, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Oka to incorporate the details of the system further comprising a rotation speed detector to detect a rotation speed of the prime mover; wherein the controller is configured or programmed to, in activating or stopping the attachment, change an amount of current change per unit time when the input current value gradually changes in a ramp manner, in accordance with the rotation speed of the prime mover detected by the rotation speed detector, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 19, Oka discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1 except fails to explicitly state that the system further comprising: a temperature detector to detect a temperature of hydraulic fluid; wherein the controller is configured or programmed to, in activating or stopping the attachment, change an amount of current change per unit time when the input current value gradually changes in a ramp manner, in accordance with the temperature of hydraulic fluid detected by the temperature detector.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claim 19 contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed controller configuration. Although Oka discloses a controller configuration for activating the attachment, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Oka to incorporate the details of the system further comprising: a temperature detector to detect a temperature of hydraulic fluid; wherein the controller is configured or programmed to, in activating or stopping the attachment, change an amount of current change per unit time when the input current value gradually changes in a ramp manner, in accordance with the temperature of hydraulic fluid detected by the temperature detector, along with the other claimed components of the hydraulic system. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Relevant Art
The following is a listing of relevant art:
US 20200048868 A1, US 20230203786 A1, US 20230070893 A1 disclose hydraulic systems comprising at least one control valve and a controller, wherein the controller is configured to activate/actuate a hydraulic actuator.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW WIBLIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9836. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NATHANIEL WIEHE can be reached on 571-272-8648. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/MATTHEW WIBLIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights