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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 1-3, 7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan et al. (7,070,831) in view of Hou (9,145,905) and Palmersheim et al. (4,359,931). Khan et al. discloses a refuse vehicle FIG. 1A with a refuse compartment 108 configured to store refuse, a hydraulic pump 2, a manifold 12,13,14 including a plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves 12,13,14 receiving hydraulic power from the hydraulic pump 2, a packer system 15 positioned in the refuse compartment, the packer system including a hydraulic actuator 15 powered by the hydraulic pump 2 via the manifold 12,13,14, and one or more processing circuits FIG. 10A comprising one or more memory devices (col. 3, line 45 – col. 4, line 3) coupled to one or more processors MP1, the one or more memory devices configured to store instructions thereon (col. 3, line 45 – col. 4, line 3) that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to determine a packing load threshold (predetermined) and operate the manifold to switch between providing non-regenerative flow of hydraulic fluid to the hydraulic actuator to providing regenerative flow of hydraulic fluid to the hydraulic actuator based on the packing load threshold. Khan et al. does not disclose an electric motor powered by a battery, that the hydraulic pump is driven by the electric motor and that the packing load threshold based on an area differential between a rod side and a bore side of the hydraulic actuator.
Hou teaches for a refuse vehicle 10 with a refuse compartment 20 configured to store refuse, a hydraulic pump 64, a manifold 74 including a plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves 76a,b,c, 92 receiving hydraulic power from the hydraulic pump 64; a packer system 90 positioned in the refuse compartment, the packer system including a hydraulic packing actuator 90 powered by the hydraulic pump 64 via the manifold 74 and that there is an electric motor 16 powered by a battery (col. 3, lines 29-43), and that the hydraulic pump 64 is driven by the electric motor 16 for the purposes of providing an alternative source of power to operate the refuse vehicle. See Hou col. 3, lines 24-43.
Khan et al. further discloses an area differential between a rod side and a bore side of the hydraulic actuator 15 (see Fig. 4). Palmersheim et al. teaches that an area differential between a rod side and a bore side of a hydraulic actuator determines the speed of movement and the force exerted by a piston rod when extended or retracted. See Palmersheim et al. col. 4, lines 21-23.
Since Khan et al., Hou, and Palmersheim et al. are all in the heavy equipment field of endeavor the purposes disclosed by Hou and Palmersheim et al. would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Khan et al. It would have been obvious at a time before the invention was effectively filed to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the refuse vehicle of Khan et al. to include an electric motor powered by a battery, wherein the hydraulic pump is driven by the electric motor for the purposes of providing an alternative source of power to operate the refuse vehicle. Factoring in the area differential between a rod side and a bore side into the threshold load determination (predetermined elevated pressure) of Khan et al. would also have been obvious at a time before the invention was effectively filed to a person having ordinary skill in the art as evidenced by Palmersheim et al. for the purposes of applying the desired force to compact refuse when the predetermined threshold load is reached.
Regarding claim 2, Khan et al. further discloses determining a load applied to the hydraulic actuator 15 based on a hydraulic pressure (pressure sensor 18) associated with the hydraulic actuator 15.
Regarding claim 3, Khan et al. further discloses that the one or more memory devices are further configured to store instructions thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to operate the manifold by selectively energizing and de-energizing the plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves 12,13,14 (col. 9, lines 37-67).
Regarding claim 7, Khan et al. further discloses that the hydraulic packing actuator includes two packer actuators 15.
Regarding claim 10, Khan et al. further discloses that a rod side of the hydraulic actuator 15 is in fluid communication with a bore side of the hydraulic actuator when the regenerative flow is provided (Pos. 3, of spool mechanism SP1 of valve 12).
Claims 4-6, 9, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan et al., Hou and Palmersheim et al., as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Yoshino (20020157528). Regarding claims 4 and 18, Khan et al, as modified, discloses all of the claimed subject matter except that the manifold includes a bore side pressure logic valve, a bore side relief logic valve, a rod side pressure logic valve, and a rod side relief logic valve, wherein the plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves are structured to control the logic valves to provide the regenerative flow and the non-regenerative flow.
Yoshino teaches for a hydraulic pump 14, a manifold (Fig. 4) including a plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves 126,128,146 receiving hydraulic power from the hydraulic pump 14, a hydraulic actuator 66 powered by the hydraulic pump 14 via the manifold and that (claims 4 and 18) the manifold includes a bore side pressure logic valve 124, a bore side relief logic valve 90, a rod side pressure logic valve 122, and a rod side relief logic valve 90, wherein the plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves 126,128,146 are structured to control the logic valves 122,124,90 to provide the regenerative flow and the non-regenerative flow (paragraph [0005]) for the purposes of improving make-up and pressure relief functions for effective operation of other high pressure and or low pressure hydraulic systems coupled with the fluid pump (paragraph [0039]).
Since Khan et al., Hou, Palmersheim et al., and Yoshino are all in the heavy equipment field of endeavor the purpose disclosed by Yoshino would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Khan et al. It would have been obvious at a time before the invention was effectively filed to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the manifold of Khan et al. to include a bore side pressure logic valve, a bore side relief logic valve, a rod side pressure logic valve, and a rod side relief logic valve, wherein the plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves are structured to control the logic valves to provide the regenerative flow and the non-regenerative flow for the purposes of improving make-up and pressure relief functions for effective operation of other high pressure and or low pressure hydraulic systems coupled with the fluid pump.
Regarding claims 5, Yoshino further teaches that the plurality of electronically controlled solenoid valves 126,128,146 include a bore side extend spool valve 128 in communication with the bore side pressure logic valve 124, a bore side retract spool valve 146 in communication with the bore side relief logic valve 90, a rod side pressure spool valve 126 in communication with the rod side pressure logic valve 122, and a rod side extend spool valve 146 in communication with the rod side relief logic valve 90.
Regarding claim 6, Yoshino further teaches that the manifold provides regenerative flow when: the bore side extend spool valve is energized, the bore side retract spool valve is de-energized, the rod side pressure spool valve is energized, and the rod side extend spool valve is de-energized (paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 9, Yoshino further teaches that hydraulic fluid flow into and out of the hydraulic actuator 66 is provided via hydraulic logic valves 122,124,90.
Regarding claim 19, Khan et al. further discloses determining a load applied to the hydraulic actuator 15 based on a hydraulic pressure (pressure sensor 18) associated with the hydraulic actuator 15.
Regarding claim 20, Khan et al. further discloses that the rod side of the hydraulic actuator 15 is in fluid communication with the bore side of the hydraulic actuator in the hydraulic actuator in the regeneration mode (Pos. 3, of spool mechanism SP1 of valve 12).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan et al., Hou, and Palmersheim et al., as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Vigholm et al. (20070166168). Khan et al. discloses all of the claimed subject matter except that the manifold includes a rod side pressure relief valve structured to vent a rod side of the hydraulic actuator to a reservoir if a rod side pressure exceeds a threshold pressure.
Vigholm et al. teaches for an electric motor 202 powered by a battery 820, a hydraulic pump 204 driven by the electric motor 202, a manifold 301 including a plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves 237,243 receiving hydraulic power from the hydraulic pump 204, a hydraulic actuator 108 powered by the hydraulic pump 204 via the manifold, and one or more processing circuits CPU comprising one or more memory devices (paragraph [0057 ]) coupled to one or more processors (paragraph [0057]), the one or more memory devices configured to store instructions thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to determine a load (via sensor 228) applied to the hydraulic actuator 108, and that (claim 8) the manifold includes a rod side pressure relief valve 224 (paragraph [0034]) structured to vent a rod side 212 of the hydraulic actuator 108 to a reservoir 216 if a rod side pressure exceeds a threshold pressure for the purposes of protecting the system from the harm of overpressure.
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.
Claims 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,365,536. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, and 6 of the patent "anticipate" application claims 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17. Accordingly, application claims 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17 are not patentably distinct from patent claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, and 6 as noted in the following table
Application Claims
Patent Claims
11 A refuse vehicle comprising: a storage compartment structured to house refuse; an electric motor powered by a battery; a hydraulic pump driven by the electric motor; a manifold including electrically actuated solenoid valves receiving hydraulic power from the hydraulic pump; a hydraulic actuator positioned in the storage compartment and powered by the hydraulic pump via the manifold; and one or more processing circuits comprising one or more memory devices coupled to one or more processors, the one or more memory devices configured to store instructions thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: determine an amount of refuse stored in the storage compartment; and
operate the manifold to selectively switch between regenerative flow of hydraulic fluid to the hydraulic actuator and non-regenerative flow of hydraulic fluid to the hydraulic actuator based on the amount of refuse
1 A refuse vehicle comprising: a storage compartment structured to house refuse; an electric motor powered by a battery; a hydraulic pump driven by the electric motor; a manifold including electrically actuated solenoid valves receiving hydraulic power from the hydraulic pump; a hydraulic actuator positioned in the storage compartment and powered by the hydraulic pump via the manifold; and one or more processing circuits comprising one or more memory devices coupled to one or more processors, the one or more memory devices configured to store instructions thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: determine an amount of refuse stored in the storage compartment based on a weight of the refuse, a volume of the refuse, and/or a number of stops of the refuse vehicle; operate the manifold to provide regenerative flow of hydraulic fluid to the hydraulic actuator when the amount of refuse is less than a threshold amount; and operate the manifold to provide non-regenerative flow of hydraulic fluid to the hydraulic actuator when the amount of refuse is greater than or equal to the threshold amount.
12 The refuse vehicle of claim 11, wherein the manifold includes: a bore side pressure logic valve; a bore side relief logic valve; a rod side pressure logic valve; and a rod side relief logic valve, wherein the electrically actuated solenoid valves are structured to control the logic valves to provide the regenerative flow and the non-regenerative flow.
2 The refuse vehicle of claim 1, wherein the manifold includes: a bore side pressure logic valve; a bore side relief logic valve; a rod side pressure logic valve; and a rod side relief logic valve, wherein the electrically actuated solenoid valves are structured to control the logic valves to provide the regenerative flow and the non-regenerative flow.
13 The refuse vehicle of claim 12, wherein the electrically actuated solenoid valves include: a bore side extend spool valve in communication with the bore side pressure logic valve; a bore side retract spool valve in communication with the bore side relief logic valve; a rod side pressure spool valve in communication with the rod side pressure logic valve; and a rod side extend spool valve in communication with the rod side relief logic valve.
3 The refuse vehicle of claim 2, wherein the plurality of electrically actuated solenoid valves include: a bore side extend spool valve in communication with the bore side pressure logic valve; a bore side retract spool valve in communication with the bore side relief logic valve; a rod side pressure spool valve in communication with the rod side pressure logic valve; and a rod side extend spool valve in communication with the rod side relief logic valve.
14 The refuse vehicle of claim 13, wherein the manifold provides regenerative flow when: the bore side extend spool valve is energized, the bore side retract spool valve is de-energized, the rod side pressure spool valve is energized, and the rod side extend spool valve is de-energized.
4 The refuse vehicle of claim 3, wherein the manifold provides regenerative flow when: the bore side extend spool valve is energized, the bore side retract spool valve is de-energized, the rod side pressure spool valve is energized, and the rod side extend spool valve is de-energized.
16 The refuse vehicle of claim 11, wherein the one or more memory devices are configured to store instructions thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to determine the amount of refuse based on a weight of the refuse, a volume of the refuse, and/or a number of stops of the refuse vehicle.
1
the one or more memory devices configured to store instructions thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to determine an amount of refuse stored in the storage compartment based on a weight of the refuse, a volume of the refuse, and/or a number of stops of the refuse vehicle;
17 The refuse vehicle of claim 11, wherein a rod side of the hydraulic actuator is in fluid communication with a bore side of the hydraulic actuator when the regenerative flow is provided.
6 The refuse vehicle of claim 1, wherein a rod side of the hydraulic actuator is in fluid communication with a bore side of the hydraulic actuator when the regenerative flow is provided
Prior Art
Prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure for showing other vehicles with regenerative and non-regenerative modes and refuse vehicles with storage compartments and packing actuators.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Thomas Lazo whose telephone number is (571) 272-4818. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 4:30 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 this Group 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.
/THOMAS E LAZO/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3745
May 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights