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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/26/2025 was filed before the first action on the merits of the application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“operation instruction signal generating unit”, claims 1-9, “unit” is a generic placeholder term and its naming does not connote a structure/is not a term of art, is functionally claimed “configured to perform…”, and there are no limitations in the claim which give structure to this unit. From [0045], [0069], and fig. 3 this generating unit is understood to be a software module stored on memory and executed by a processor/computer of the control unit/device.
“reference point setting unit”, claim 1-9, “unit” is generic placeholder and naming does not connote a structure/is not a term of art, is functionally claimed “configured to”, and there are no limitations in the claim(s) which give structure to this unit. From [0045] and fig. 3 is understood to be the processor/memory/software (i.e. is not the display unit/input/output with an operator but instead is the computer)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by US 20210164192 A1,” LOADING MACHINE CONTROL DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD”, Konda et al.
Regarding Claim 1, Konda et al teaches “. A control device of a work machine including a revolving body configured to revolve around a revolution center, and a work implement including a work tool and attached to the revolving body,”( [0018] The loading machine 100 includes an undercarriage 110, a swing body 120 supported by the undercarriage 110, and work equipment 130 that is driven by hydraulic pressure and is supported by the swing body 120. The swing body 120 is supported so as to be swingable around the center of swing.);” the control device comprising: an operation instruction signal generating unit configured to perform control of moving the work tool to a target position”([0041] The control device 128 is a computer including a processor 1100, a main memory 1200, a storage 1300, and an interface 1400. The storage 1300 stores a program. The processor 1100 reads the program from the storage 1300 to deploy the program in the main memory 1200 and to then execute a process according to the program.” + [0064] “FIGS. 5 and 7 are flowcharts illustrating the automatic excavation and loading control according to the first embodiment. When the control device 128 receives an input of the excavation and loading instruction signal from the operator, the control device 128 executes the automatic excavation and loading control illustrated in FIGS. 5 to 7”);” and a reference point setting unit configured to set a reference point,”( [0069] The avoidance position specifying unit 1107 specifies the interference avoidance position P02 based on the no-load swing start position P01 determined in step S6 and the position and shape of the loading target 200 specified by the loading target specifying unit 1106 (step S9).” The avoidance point P02 is a reference point set (in reference to height) which the bucket is control in reference to for transitioning between the unloading/dumping (P01-P02 of figure 3) and the loading/excavation (P02-P05 region));” wherein the operation instruction signal generating unit performs the control on the basis of the reference point.”( [0070] The movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has reached the swing end position P04 (step S10). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not reached the swing end position P04 (step S10: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 does not generate an operation signal for the boom 131, the arm 132, and the bucket 133. Namely, when the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02, the movement processing unit 1112 prohibits the output of an operation signal that causes the work equipment 130 to be lowered.)
PNG
media_image1.png
680
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Konda et al teaches “The control device according to claim 1, wherein the operation instruction signal generating unit performs the control on the basis of a first region and a second region each having a boundary at a perpendicular plane including the reference point and a revolution axis passing through the revolution center.”( [0070] The movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has reached the swing end position P04 (step S10). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not reached the swing end position P04 (step S10: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 does not generate an operation signal for the boom 131, the arm 132, and the bucket 133. Namely, when the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02, the movement processing unit 1112 prohibits the output of an operation signal that causes the work equipment 130 to be lowered.” + fig. 3 posted above Point P02 (interference avoidance position) represents the transition between the two control regions/zones Looking at the overhead view (top portion of fig. 3) and the side view (lower portion of fig. 3) this means the two regions can be expressed as being divided by a perpendicular plane extending from the rotation of the body of the excavator out to the Point P02)
Regarding Claim 3, Konda et al teaches “The control device according to claim 2, wherein as the control, the operation instruction signal generating unit performs control of an attitude of the work implement and control of revolution of the revolving body in a combined manner in the first region, and in the second region, performs control of revolution of the revolving body.”( [0070] The movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has reached the swing end position P04 (step S10). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not reached the swing end position P04 (step S10: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 does not generate an operation signal for the boom 131, the arm 132, and the bucket 133. Namely, when the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02, the movement processing unit 1112 prohibits the output of an operation signal that causes the work equipment 130 to be lowered.” + Fig. 3 Depending on where the bucket is on the automatic loading/unloading cycle compared to the interference avoidance point the lowering of the bucket/work equipment is prohibited or not (i.e. in a first region the equipment is controlled in a combined manner where it can rotate and adjust the attitude, and a second region which rotation is permitted but not attitude))
Regarding Claim 4, Konda teaches “The control device according to claim 2, wherein as the control, the operation instruction signal generating unit performs first revolution control in which the work tool is moved to a soil removal point corresponding to the target position for unloading, or performs second revolution control in which the work tool is moved to an excavation starting point corresponding to the target position for loading.”( [0070] The movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has reached the swing end position P04 (step S10). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not reached the swing end position P04 (step S10: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 does not generate an operation signal for the boom 131, the arm 132, and the bucket 133. Namely, when the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02, the movement processing unit 1112 prohibits the output of an operation signal that causes the work equipment 130 to be lowered.” + Fig. 3 P01-P02 moving region corresponds to the first revolution control to/from a soil loading point, P02-P03 represents the second moving control to a soil excavation point/starting point)
Regarding Claim 5, Konda teaches “The control device according to claim 4, wherein the first region is a region from the excavation starting point to the perpendicular plane, and the second region is a region from the soil removal point to the perpendicular plane.”(See claim 2’s rejection, as seen in fig.3 the two regions are divided by the transition point P02, this forms a perpendicular plane between the center of rotation of the body of the excavator and this point where depending on which side of the plane the excavator is operating in the different control schemes are used.)
Regarding Claim 6, Konda teaches “The control device according to claim 4, wherein the operation instruction signal generating unit performs the second revolution control on the basis of the soil removal point and the perpendicular plane.”( See claim 2’s rejection, as seen in fig.3 the two regions are divided by the transition point P02, this forms a perpendicular plane between the center of rotation of the body of the excavator and this point where depending on which side of the plane the excavator is operating in the different control schemes are used.)
Regarding Claim 7, Konda teaches “The control device according to claim 6, wherein in the second revolution control, in a case where the work tool passes through an interference avoiding plane including the reference point used to avoid interference, the operation instruction signal generating unit performs control such that a predetermined height of the work tool is equal to or higher than a height of the reference point at the interference avoiding plane.”( [0070] The movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has reached the swing end position P04 (step S10). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not reached the swing end position P04 (step S10: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11). When the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11: NO), the movement processing unit 1112 does not generate an operation signal for the boom 131, the arm 132, and the bucket 133. Namely, when the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has not passed through the interference avoidance position P02, the movement processing unit 1112 prohibits the output of an operation signal that causes the work equipment 130 to be lowered.” While the excavator is within the zone/region between P01 and P02 (i.e. has passed through an avoiding plane which includes the point; the excavator is control such that the height of the bucket cannot be lower than the height of the interference avoidance point)
Regarding Claim 8, Konda teaches “The control device according to claim 4, wherein the operation instruction signal generating unit performs the first revolution control on the basis of the excavation starting point and the reference point.”( [0071] “On the other hand, when the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 has passed through the interference avoidance position P02 (step S11: YES), the lowering stop determination unit 1110 determines whether or not the position P of the tip end of the arm 132 is higher than the swing end position P04 (step S12). When the position P of the tip end of the arm 132 is higher than the swing end position P04 (step S12: YES), the movement processing unit 1112 generates an operation signal for the boom 131 and the arm 132 to cause the position P of the tip end portion of the arm 132 to be lowered (step S13).” + Fig. 3; the bucket is controlled via the positioning as shown in figure 3 between P02 and the excavator start point)
Regarding Claim 9, Konda teaches “The control device according to claim 2, wherein the reference point is set to avoid interference between the work implement and a loading target.”([0052] “The avoidance position specifying unit 1107 specifies an interference avoidance position P02 which is a point where the work equipment 130 and the loading target 200 do not interfere with each other in a plan view from above, based on the position of the loading machine 100 acquired by the vehicle information acquisition unit 1101 and the position and shape of the loading target 200 specified by the loading target specifying unit 1106.”)
Regarding Claim 10-11 are method and work machine equivalents to the device claim 1, it has the same overall grounds of rejection
Regarding Claim 12, see Konda claim 9’s rejection, claim 12 equivalent to claim 9 but with a different dependency. The grounds of rejection are identical to claim 9’s cited section.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20170073925 A1; US 20180119383 A1; WO 2019151335 A1; US 20190390436 A1; US 20200283993 A1; WO 2022064968 A1; US 20220170242 A1; WO 2022145498 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MICHAEL DUNNE whose telephone number is (571)270-7392. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:30-6:30.
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 Z 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.
/KENNETH M DUNNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights