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 Objections
Claims 1 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 Ln 9, please amend to --which [[an]] the electric power--, to align with Ln 4.
Claim 6 Ln 2, please amend to --component is a power drive unit (PDU)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by TAKEUCHI; Ken et al. US 20150345110 A1, hereafter Takeuchi.
Regarding claim 1, Takeuchi discloses (Fig. 2-5) an electric working machine comprising:
a turning frame (6);
an electric motor (12) that is arranged on the turning frame;
a battery unit (19/21/29) that is arranged on the turning frame and stores electric power for driving the electric motor [0047];
a hydraulic pump (11) that is arranged on the turning frame and driven by the electric motor [0039]; and
a first electrical component (25) that is arranged on the turning frame and through which [[an]] the electric power output from the battery unit passes [0051],
wherein the first electrical component, the electric motor, and the hydraulic pump are arranged in a row in a horizontal direction (as depicted in Fig. 3, (25, 12, 11) are depicted in a row in a left/right/horizontal direction).
Regarding claim 2, Takeuchi discloses (Fig. 2-5) the electric motor (12) and the hydraulic pump (11) are connected [0039].
Regarding claim 3, Takeuchi discloses (Fig. 2-5) the electric motor (12) is arranged between the first electrical component (25) and the hydraulic pump ((11), (12) is depicted between (25 & 11)).
Regarding claim 4, Takeuchi discloses (Fig. 2-5) a second electrical component (26) is arranged behind the first electrical component (25) and through which the electric power from the battery unit passes [0051].
Regarding claim 5, Takeuchi discloses (Fig. 2-5) the second electrical component (26) is a junction box (“junction box” [0051]).
Regarding claim 6, Takeuchi discloses (Fig. 2-5) the first electrical component (25) is a power drive unit (PDU) (“controlling input/output of electrical power” [0051], similar to the definition used by the applicant’s specification [0024]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,385,216. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. See the below chart for comparison between the claim limitations whereby the claim limitations are not identical but are not patentably distinct from each other.
19/270,359
12,385,216
1
an electric working machine comprising:
1
An electric working machine comprising:
a lower traveling body;
a turning frame;
an upper turning body that is positioned above the lower traveling body and provided to be turnable with respect to the lower traveling body;
an electric motor that is arranged on the turning frame;
an electric motor that is arranged in the upper turning body;
a battery unit that is arranged on the turning frame and stores electric power for driving the electric motor;
a battery unit that is arranged in the upper turning body and stores electric power for driving the electric motor;
a hydraulic pump that is arranged on the turning frame and driven by the electric motor; and
a hydraulic pump that is arranged in the upper turning body and driven by the electric motor, a hydraulic actuator that is driven by supply of hydraulic oil from the hydraulic pump; and
a hydraulic oil tank that accommodates the hydraulic oil,
wherein the upper turning body includes a turning frame at a bottom, the battery unit is arranged on the turning frame, and the electric motor is arranged above the battery unit and
wherein a part of the hydraulic pump protrudes laterally from the battery unit,
a first electrical component that is arranged on the turning frame and through which the electric power output from the battery unit passes,
an electrical component is laterally arranged next to the electric motor, and
wherein the first electrical component, the electric motor, and the hydraulic pump are arranged in a row in a horizontal direction
the electrical component, the electric motor, and the hydraulic pump are arranged in a row in a horizontal direction above the battery unit.
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/ Examiner, Art Unit 3745