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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/09/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pesci (US 3691904).
Pesci discloses:
1. A telescoping, hydraulic cylinder (1, see abstract), comprising:
a plurality of stages (3, 6, 10, 11, 12) of the cylinder each comprising a rod and piston (first stage 3 has first piston 4, and rod 103, second stage 6 has piston 8 with rod that forms gap 106, etc. see Col. 2 lines 20-68) extending sequentially (Col. 4 lines 16-25 discloses fully expanding in order which provides that the outer stage unit 3 slides out first, followed in succession by the inner stage units 6 and 10-12),
said plurality of stages comprising at least a first and a second stage (first stage 3, second stage 6);
wherein each of the plurality of stages share a common hydraulic oil extension path with the common oil acting on each of the pistons of the plurality of stages to extend the rods thereof (common oil path connected to 301 acts on all of the stages 3, 6, 10, 11, and 12 simultaneously); and
a separate hydraulic oil retraction path (19), said hydraulic oil retraction path comprising a valve (14) in line with the second stage (valve 14 is interpreted to be in line with the second stage because it forms part of the fluid line from the second stage pressure chamber to the tank S);
wherein extension of the second stage is mitigated until a pressure at the valve (14) in the retract path is overcome during extension of the plurality of stages (Col. 3 lines 58-67, Col. 4 lines 1-37 states that the discharge valve 14 is calibrated to have a counter force to the extending force of the supply fluid pressure such that the fluid in the annular chambers A1 and A2 do not escape the cylinder housing until a pressure in the delivery side reaches a predetermined threshold; “thus fully expanding in the order which provides that the outer stage unit 3 slides out first, followed in succession by the inner stage units 6 and 10-12” indicates that the second stage 6 remains retracted until the required pressure threshold is met).
2. The telescoping, hydraulic cylinder of claim 1, wherein the plurality of stages comprises a first stage, a second stage, and a third stage (stages 3, 6, 10).
3. The telescoping, hydraulic cylinder of claim 2, wherein the valve of the hydraulic oil retraction path is in line with both the second and third stages (valve 14 is interpreted to be in line with the second stage because it forms part of the fluid line from the second stage and third stage pressure chambers to the tank S).
4. The telescoping, hydraulic cylinder of claim 1, wherein the valve comprises a relief valve (Col. 4 lines 9-14 states that valve 14 is a safety valve which opens when a pressure value corresponding to the maximum pressure value to which the annular chambers can be subjected, this makes this valve function as relief valve which opens at a given threshold pressure).
5. The telescoping, hydraulic cylinder of claim 1, wherein the valve comprises a check valve (valve 14 is a check valve because it only allows fluid flow in one direction due to the bias of the spring as seen in Fig. 2).
6. The telescoping, hydraulic cylinder of claim 1, further comprising an end mount at an end of cylinder (absent further limitations pertaining to what an "end mount" requires, the end structure of 10 is interpreted to be an "end mount").
10. A method of operating a multi-stage hydraulic cylinder, comprising:
supplying oil to a common end of a plurality of stages of the multi-stage hydraulic cylinder via a shared extension path until a first stage reaches its extension;
continuing to supply oil to overcome a pressure of a valve to open said valve at a second stage of the multi-stage hydraulic cylinder,
wherein the valve is opened to allow oil at a retract side of the second stage to be removed to allow extension of the second stage (see claim 1 rejection for equivalent limitation mapping and discussion; Col. 3 lines 58-67, Col. 4 lines 1-37).
11. The method of claim 10, further comprising, after the second stage has extended, continuing to supply oil to extend a third stage of the multi-stage hydraulic cylinder (Col. 4 lines 16-25, etc.).
12. The method of claim 10, wherein the multi-stage hydraulic cylinder comprises a shared retraction path (path that includes 401, 19, etc.) for oil to be added and removed to the plurality of stages.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein the valve is in the shared retraction path (valve 14 is in the retraction path).
14. The method of claim 13, further comprising a free flow valve in the shared retraction path to allow for retraction of the plurality of stages (valve 13 is a unidirectional free-inflow valve 13, Col. 3 line 32).
15. The method of claim 10, wherein the oil is supplied to the common end of the plurality of stages at a shared oil pool (tank S is a shared oil pool, see Fig. 1, Col. 3 lines 47).
16. The method of claim 10, wherein the valve mitigates opening of the retraction path of the second stage, meaning that oil will remain in a retraction path of the second stage to mitigate movement of said second stage until the pressure is overcome (Col. 3 lines 58-67, Col. 4 lines 1-37 states that the discharge valve 14 is calibrated to have a counter force to the extending force of the supply fluid pressure such that the fluid in the annular chambers A1 and A2 do not escape the cylinder housing until a pressure in the delivery side reaches a predetermined threshold; “thus fully expanding in the order which provides that the outer stage unit 3 slides out first, followed in succession by the inner stage units 6 and 10-12” indicates that the second stage 6 remains retracted until the required pressure threshold is met).
17. A multi-stage, telescoping hydraulic cylinder, comprising:
a plurality of stages each comprising a rod and a piston;
wherein each of the plurality of stages share a common hydraulic oil extension path with the oil acting on each of the pistons of the plurality of stages to extend the rods thereof; and
a valve in a retraction line for at least a second stage, said valve mitigating oil from a retraction side of the second stage until pressure is overcome by continued addition of oil at an extension side (see claim 1 and 10 rejection for equivalent limitation mapping and discussion).
18. The multi-stage, telescoping hydraulic cylinder of claim 17, wherein the plurality of stages comprises a first stage, a second stage, and a third stage (see claim 2 for equivalent limitation mapping and discussion).
19. The multi-stage, telescoping hydraulic cylinder of claim 18, wherein the valve of the retraction path is in line with both the second and third stages (see claim 3 for equivalent limitation mapping and discussion).
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.
Claim(s) 7, 8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pesci in view of Voisine et al. (US 10598219), hereinafter ‘Voisine’.
Regarding claim 7 and 20, Pesci discloses the telescopic hydraulic cylinder of claim 6 and 17, respectively, but does not disclose wherein the end mount comprises a spherical bearing to allow articulated movement.
However, Voisine discloses telescopic cylinders 206A, 206B similar to the telescopic cylinders of Pesci and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art. Voisine discloses that spherical plain bearings are necessary to reduce friction between moving parts of a mechanical assembly such as those of industrial vehicles (Voisine Col. 2 lines 30-40). Voisine teaches using spherical bearings that include a scraper associated with the spherical bearing to remove material therefrom (Voisine see abstract, Col. 9 lines 43-67 and Col. 10 lines 1-5; scrapers 81).
Since Pesci discloses that its hydraulic cylinder is used in an industrial vehicle (Pesci Col. 1 lines 5-12), and since reducing friction between moving parts of a mechanical assembly is a known technique in the art in the field of industrial vehicles, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Pesci to have used an end mount at an end of cylinder, wherein the end mount comprises a spherical bearing to allow articulated movement as taught by Voisine to yield only the predictable results of a functioning end mount of a hydraulic cylinder.
The combination of Pesci and Voisine further renders obvious:
8. The telescoping, hydraulic cylinder of claim 7, further comprising a scraper associated with the spherical bearing to remove material therefrom (the implemented spherical bearing of Voisine include scrapers 81 that remove material therefrom; Voisine see abstract, Col. 9 lines 43-67 and Col. 10 lines 1-5).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pesci in view of Sievenpiper (US 3765690).
Regarding claim 9, Pesci discloses the telescopic hydraulic cylinder of claim 1, but does not disclose a scraper assembly associated with the rods of the plurality of stages to remove material therefrom.
However, Sievenpiper discloses a hydraulic cylinder (Sievenpiper 10) similar to Pesci and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art. Sievenpiper discloses a scraper assembly (Sievenpiper 50, 50', 50'' as seen in Fig. 1 and 2) and discloses that ring (Sievenpiper 50) scrapes and wipes the interior rod (Sievenpiper 14)clean. The other wipers (Sievenpiper 50' and 50'') similarly scrape and wipe inner rods (Sievenpiper 16 and 18) clean when the device is retracted by their engagement with their respective relatively inner rods.
It is obvious to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(A). The MPEP states the prior art must: (1) teach each claimed element (a method or apparatus that will be modified), (2) show that one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements by known methods and that the combination doesn’t change the function of the elements, and (3) show that one of ordinary skill would have recognized that applying the known technique to the base device would yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(A).
In this case, Pesci teaches all elements except a scraper assembly associated with the rods of the plurality of stages to remove material therefrom. Sievenpiper teaches a scraper assembly associated with the rods of the plurality of stages to remove material therefrom, which has the function of removing debris and buildup on the rods. When combined into Pesci in the same manner as disclosed by Sievenpiper where the wiper/scraper rings are positioned on an end of a telescopic stage and engaged with a relatively inner rod, it maintains its function of removing debris and buildup from the rods when the retract. One of ordinary skill would expect predictable results because both references pertain to telescoping hydraulic cylinders that function in the same manner in the environment of fluid pressure actuators.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Pesci in view of Sievenpiper because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yamamoto et al. (US 7651274) discloses telescoping hydraulic cylinder 1 that is used in a construction work vehicle (Yamamoto Col. 4 lines 56-60) similar to how Pesci's hydraulic cylinder is used in an industrial vehicle (Pesci Col. 1 lines 5-12). Yamamoto discloses using a spherical bearing 10 to form an end mount 5 on the end of its hydraulic cylinder 1 to provide a suitable connection to a pin connection (Col. 1 lines 12-17, Col. 8 lines 63-67).
Dauderman et al. (US 9988793) discloses a hydraulic telescopic cylinder similar to Pesci and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art. Dauderman discloses a hydraulic cylinder 122 that comprising a scraper assembly 310 associated with the rods 208 of the plurality of stages to remove material therefrom.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dustin T Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-0163. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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, Nathaniel E. Wiehe can be reached at (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 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.
/DUSTIN T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 June 4, 2026
Prosecution Insights