Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 1 of 110 PageID #: 40532
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 1 of 110 PagelD #: 40532
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 24
`EXHIBIT 24
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 2 of 110 PageID #: 40533
`.,0147'"ant4t,‘ UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`• A7 *1`
`
`OF CO
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`90/019,472
`
`04/05/2024
`
`7523995
`
`3994.015REX0
`
`4546
`
`07/02/2024
`
`7590
`719
`Caterpillar Inc.
`Intellectual Property Dept.
`100 N.E. Adams Street
`AB6450
`PEORIA, IL 61629-6450
`
`EXAMINER
`
`ENGLISH, PETER C
`
`ART UNIT
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`3993
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/02/2024
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 3 of 110 PageID #: 40534
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Commissioner for Patents
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`DO NOT USE IN PALM PRINTER
`
`(THIRD PARTY REQUESTER'S CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS)
`
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P. L. L.C.
`1101 K Street, NW
`10th Floor
`WASHINGTON DC 20005
`
`EXPARTEREEXAMINATION COMMUNICATION TRANSMITTAL FORM
`
`REEXAMINATION CONTROL NO. 90/019,472 .
`
`PATENT UNDER REEXAMINATION 7523995.
`
`ART UNIT 3993 .
`
`Enclosed is a copy of the latest communication from the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office in the above identified ex parte reexamination proceeding (37 CFR 1.550(f)).
`
`Where this copy is supplied after the reply by requester, 37 CFR 1.535, or the time for filing a
`reply has passed, no submission on behalf of the ex parte reexamination requester will be
`acknowledged or considered (37 CFR 1.550(g)).
`
`PTOL-465 (Rev.07-04)
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 4 of 110 PageID #: 40535
`
`Order Granting Request For
`Ex Parte Reexamination
`
`Control No.
`
`90/019,472
`
`Examiner
`
`Patent Under Reexamination
`
`7523995
`
`Art Unit
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`
`Peter C English
`
`3993
`
`No
`
`--The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address--
`
`The request for exparte reexamination filed 05 April 2024 has been considered and a determination has
`been made. An identification of the claims, the references relied upon, and the rationale supporting the
`determination are attached.
`
`Attachments: a)CJ PTO-892,
`
`b) 0
`
`PTO/SB/08,
`
`c)O Other:
`
`1. C) The request for exparte reexamination is GRANTED.
`
`RESPONSE TIMES ARE SET AS FOLLOWS:
`
`For Patent Owner's Statement (Optional): TWO MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication
`(37 CFR 1.530 (b)). EXTENSIONS OF TIME ARE GOVERNED BY 37 CFR 1.550(c).
`
`For Requester's Reply (optional): TWO MONTHS from the date of service of any timely filed
`Patent Owner's Statement (37 CFR 1.535). NO EXTENSION OF THIS TIME PERIOD IS PERMITTED.
`If Patent Owner does not file a timely statement under 37 CFR 1.530(b), then no reply by requester
`is permitted.
`
`cc:Requester ( if third party requester )
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-471G(Rev. 01-13)
`
`Office Action in Ex Parte Reexamination
`
`Part of Paper No. 20240424
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 5 of 110 PageID #: 40536
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 2
`
`DECISION GRANTING EX PARTE REEXAMINATION
`
`1.
`
`A substantial new question of patentability (SNQ) affecting claims 16, 43 and 45-63 of
`
`US Patent No. 7,523,995 B2 (995 patent) is raised by the present request for ex parte
`
`reexamination.
`
`Listing of Prior Art
`
`2.
`
`The following is a listing of the prior art documents relied upon, together with the
`
`shorthand reference for each document (listed alphabetically):
`
`"Bitelli `037"
`
`EP Publication No. 1 039 037 A2
`
`"Bitelli `088"
`
`EP Publication No. 1 001 088 A2
`
`"Dubay `117"
`
`WO Publication No. 02/103117 Al
`
`"Dubay `693"
`
`US Patent No. 7,140,693 B2
`
`"Feliz"
`
`"GC-IIP"
`
`"Gutman"
`
`"Littman"
`
`"McColl"
`
`US Patent No. 4,167,826
`
`"New Generation Commander III Trimmer/Paver Operator
`and Service Manual G21 Controls", © 2002 by GOMACO
`Corporation, Form No. NC-3N0402-C1, Revision 1.3, pages
`1-2 through 9-7 (Chapters I-IX).
`
`US Patent No. 3,843,274
`
`US Patent No. 4,558,758
`
`US Patent No. 4,237,994
`
`"McCutcheon"
`
`US Patent No. 4,566,553
`
`"Piccoli"
`
`"Schaffer"
`
`"Simons"
`
`"Skotnikov"
`
`"Smolders"
`
`"Titford"
`
`US Publication No. 2003/0180092 Al
`
`US Patent No. 6,371,237 B1
`
`US Patent No. 6,106,073
`
`US Patent No. 6,311,795 B1
`
`US Patent No. 6,481,924 B1
`
`US Patent No. 6,435,766 B1
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 6 of 110 PageID #: 40537
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 3
`
`"Volpe"
`
`"Whitaker"
`
`"Williams"
`
`"Wirtgen"
`
`"VOLPE SF 100 T4 Alta Profondita: Manuale d'Istruzione e
`manutenzione" (Operating Instructions for Bitelli Cold
`Planer), Bitelli Societa per Azioni, Edition 388 01 91, dated
`October 1993, 105 pages.
`
`US Patent No. 5,127,335
`
`US Patent No. 3,826,322
`
`US Patent No. 4,966,418
`
`Earlier Inter Partes Reviews
`
`3.
`
`US Patent No. 7,523,995 B2 was the subject of two prior inter partes reviews (IPRs)
`
`before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB): IPR2022-01394 and IPR 2022-01395.
`
`4.
`
`In the Final Written Decision (FWD) issued in IPR2022-01394 on 05 March 2024, the
`
`PTAB found that:
`
`• The means-plus-function language of claim 45 invokes 35 USC 112 6. (FWD,
`
`pp. 25-26.)
`
`• Petitioner failed to identify (i) the claimed function for the "controller means"
`
`(claim 45,1. 18), and (ii) the structure identified in the specification of US Patent
`
`No. 7,523,995 B2 as corresponding to the "controller means". (FWD, p. 26.)
`
`• The patent specification identifies the structure corresponding to the "second
`
`actuatable means" (claim 45,1. 12) as either a rotary or linear actuator and does
`
`require such actuator to be positioned at a top portion of the lifting column.
`
`(FWD, pp. 26-30 and 63-64.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claims 18, 29 and 31 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over
`
`the combination of Volpe and Piccoli. (FWD, pp. 31-58 and 62-63.)
`
`• The Volpe and Piccoli combination teaches the "spaced apart" limitation of claim
`
`181 because (i) Piccoli teaches a second actuator (i.e., steering cylinder) 48 spaced
`
`apart from a first actuator (i.e., shift cylinder) 76 along the vertical axis of a lifting
`
`I Claim 18 recites "said second actuator being positioned at a location linearly spaced apart from said first
`actuator along said lifting column axis" (11. 17-19).
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 7 of 110 PageID #: 40538
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 4
`
`column 50, and (ii) the skilled artisan would have employed such a spaced apart
`
`arrangement in combining Volpe and Piccoli. (FWD, pp. 56-57.)
`
`• Petitioner did not prove claim 30 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Volpe and Piccoli. (FWD, pp. 58-62.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claims 21-27, 32 and 35 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103
`
`over the combination of Volpe, Piccoli and Skotnikov. (FWD, pp. 68-76.)
`
`• Skotnikov teaches the claimed controller that coordinates actuation of first and
`
`second actuators in a predetermined manner based on inputs from a rotational
`
`steering sensor and a rotational or linear pivot sensor, and it would have been
`
`obvious to apply such a control system to the Volpe and Piccoli combination.
`
`(FWD, pp. 68-74.)
`
`• Piccoli's steering cylinder satisfies the "second actuatable means" of claim 45.
`
`(FWD, pp. 63-64.)
`
`• Petitioner did not prove claims 45, 49-55, 57-60 and 63 to be unpatentable under
`
`35 USC 103 over the combination of Volpe, Piccoli and Skotnikov because
`
`petitioner failed to identify the disclosed structure corresponding to the "controller
`
`means" (claim 45, 1. 18) and, thus, was unable to prove that the prior art teaches
`
`this limitation. (FWD, pp. 64-68, 75 and 76.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claim 28 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Volpe, Piccoli, Skotnikov and McColl. (FWD, pp. 76-77.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claim 33 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Volpe, Piccoli and Dubay `117. (FWD, p. 77.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claim 34 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Volpe, Piccoli and McCutcheon. (FWD, pp. 77-78.)
`
`• Petitioner did not prove claim 56 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Volpe, Piccoli, Skotnikov and McColl because of petitioner's
`
`failure with respect to the "controller means" of claim 45. (FWD, p. 78.)
`
`• Petitioner did not prove claim 61 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Volpe, Piccoli, Skotnikov and Dubay `117 because of petitioner's
`
`failure with respect to the "controller means" of claim 45. (FWD, p. 78.)
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 8 of 110 PageID #: 40539
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 5
`
`• Petitioner did not prove claim 62 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Volpe, Piccoli, Skotnikov and McCutcheon because of
`
`petitioner's failure with respect to the "controller means" of claim 45. (FWD, p.
`
`78.)
`
`5.
`
`In response to the FWD issued in IPR2022-01394, petitioner filed a request for director
`
`review on 01 April 2024. That request was denied by the Order issued on 24 April 2024. In
`
`response to the FWD issued in IPR2022-01394, petitioner filed a request for director review on
`
`01 April 2024. That request was denied by the Order issued on 24 April 2024.
`
`6.
`
`In the FWD issued in IPR2022-01395 on 05 March 2024, the PTAB found that:
`
`• The means-plus-function language of claim 45 invokes 35 USC 112 6. (FWD,
`
`pp. 28-29.)
`
`• Petitioner failed to identify (i) the claimed function for each of the means-plus-
`
`function limitations of claim 45 (as well as claims 49, 51 and 61), and (ii) the
`
`structure identified in the specification of US Patent No. 7,523,995 B2 as
`
`corresponding to each of the means-plus-function limitations of claim 45 (as well
`
`as claims 49, 51 and 61). (FWD, pp. 29-35.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claims 18-20, 29-31 and 33 to be unpatentable under 35 USC
`
`103 over the combination of Bitelli `088 and Feliz. (FWD, pp. 36-60.)
`
`• Bitelli `037 evidences that the skilled artisan would have (i) appreciated that
`
`Bitelli `088 suffers from wheel scraping when the rear wheel is in the retracted
`
`position, and (ii) had reason to modify Bitelli `088 to overcome this problem.
`
`(FWD, pp. 36-37, 39 and 41-42.)
`
`• Titford evidences that the skilled artisan would have known that a rotary actuator
`
`can be located at an upper portion of a lifting column and, thus, supports the
`
`conclusion that it would have been obvious to modify Bitelli `088 in view of Feliz
`
`to include a rotary actuator at the upper portion of the lifting column. (FWD, pp.
`
`42-43.)
`
`• The Bitelli `088 and Feliz combination teaches the "spaced apart" limitation of
`
`claim 18 because, in combining Bitelli `088 and Feliz, the skilled artisan would
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 9 of 110 PageID #: 40540
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 6
`
`have positioned (i) the first actuator near the lower portion of the lifting column
`
`(as in Bitelli `088), and (ii) the second actuator at the upper portion of the lifting
`
`column (as taught by Feliz). (FWD, pp. 56-57.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claims 1-9, 11-15, 17, 21-27, 32, 35-40, 42 and 44 to be
`
`unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Bitelli `088, Feliz and
`
`Skotnikov. (FWD, pp. 61-72 and 73.)
`
`• Skotnikov teaches the claimed controller that is programmed to coordinate
`
`actuation of first and second actuators to precisely control steering based on
`
`feedback from a rotational steering sensor and a pivot sensor (i.e., by calculating a
`
`steering error based on sensor input and adjusting the steering to correct for the
`
`error), and it would have been obvious to apply such a control system to the
`
`Bitelli `088 and Feliz combination to improve the accuracy of the machine's
`
`steering. (FWD, pp. 61-64 and 68-71.)
`
`• The Bitelli `088 and Feliz combination teaches the claimed second actuator for
`
`rotating a ground engaging unit about a lifting column axis, and the Bitelli `088,
`
`Feliz and Skotnikov combination teaches the claimed controller for coordinating
`
`actuation of the first and second actuators in such a way that the second actuator
`
`maintains the same rotational direction of at least one ground engaging unit in
`
`each of the projecting and retracted positions. (FWD, pp. 64-68.)
`
`• Petitioner did not prove claims 45-55, 57-61 and 63 to be unpatentable under 35
`
`USC 103 over the combination of Bitelli `088, Feliz and Skotnikov because
`
`petitioner failed to identify the disclosed structure corresponding to each of the
`
`means-plus-function limitations of claim 45 and, thus, was unable to prove that
`
`the prior art teaches these limitations. (FWD, pp. 72-73.)
`
`• Petitioner proved claims 10, 28 and 41 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over
`
`the combination of Bitelli `088, Feliz, Skotnikov and McColl. FWD, pp. 73-74.
`
`• Petitioner did not prove claim 56 to be unpatentable under 35 USC 103 over the
`
`combination of Bitelli `088, Feliz, Skotnikov and McColl because of petitioner's
`
`failure with respect to the means-plus-function limitations of claim 45. (FWD, p.
`
`74.)
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 10 of 110 PageID #: 40541
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 7
`
`Pending Litigation
`
`7.
`
`In response to the FWD issued in IPR2022-01394 and the subsequent order denying
`
`director review, petitioner filed a notice of appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal
`
`Circuit (CAFC) on 03 May 2024.
`
`8.
`
`In response to the FWD issued in IPR2022-01395, petitioner filed a notice of appeal to
`
`the CAFC on 03 May 2024.
`
`9.
`
`US Patent No. 7,523,995 B2 is also one of the patents involved in pending litigation:
`
`Wirtgen America, Inc. v. Caterpillar, Inc., US District-Delaware, No. 1:17cv00770.
`
`10.
`
`In the Memorandum Opinion (Docket 167) issued on 10 March 2023, the US District
`
`Court for the District of Delaware construed disputed claim limitations in US Patent No.
`
`7,523,995 B2 and found that:
`
`• The phrase "between projecting and retracted positions relative to said machine
`
`frame" (claim 1,11. 13-15; claim 45,11. 10-11) means between positions that are
`
`farther from or closer to the machine frame, and does not require the projecting
`
`position to be outside the machine frame or the retracted position to be within the
`
`machine frame. See pp. 14-15.
`
`• The limitation "second actuatable means for rotating said at least one ground
`
`engaging unit" (claim 45,11. 12-13) invokes 35 USC 112 1 6, the patent
`
`specification identifies the corresponding structure as an actuator, such as a linear
`
`or rotary actuator, and the patent specification does require such actuator to be
`
`positioned at a top portion of the lifting column. See pp. 16-17.
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`11.
`
`During examination, the pending claims are normally interpreted according to the
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation standard (hereinafter, the "BRI standard"). That is, claims are
`
`given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and limitations in
`
`the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP 2111 et seq.
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 11 of 110 PageID #: 40542
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 8
`
`12.
`
`During reexamination of an unexpired patent, claims are interpreted under the BRI
`
`standard, and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP 2258,
`
`subsection G.
`
`13.
`
`An exception to the BRI standard occurs when a claim recites a means-plus-function
`
`limitation that must be interpreted in accordance with 35 USC 112 1 6, or 35 USC 112(f). See
`
`MPEP 2181. According to the guidance provided by Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d
`
`1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc), 35 USC 112 1 6 applies when the claim term fails to recite (i)
`
`sufficiently definite structure, and/or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function.
`
`14.
`
`The following table identifies claim terms that are considered by the examiner to require
`
`
`
`analysis in order to determine whether they invoke 35 USC 11216.2 The table also identifies the
`
`
`
`claimed functions associated with these claim terms and the corresponding structure identified in
`
`the patent specification.
`
`Corresponding Structure
`Claimed Function(s)
`Claim Term
`support a machine frame Wheels or track sections (having rollers,
`ground
`engaging units by engaging the ground
`tensioning devices, etc.) each adapted to
`(claim 1, 11. 2-
`(claim 1, 11. 2-3; claim 36,
`revolve in both forward and reverse directions
`3; claim 36, 11.
`11. 3-6; claim 45, 11. 2-3)
`about an axis (col. 3, 11. 48-49; col. 5, 11. 25-31).
`3-4; claim 45,
`11. 2-3)
`support device
`(claim 1, 1. 4)
`
`a) controllably raise and
`lower at least one
`ground engaging unit
`relative to a frame
`(claim 1, 11. 8-10)
`b) allow/provide
`movement of at least
`one ground engaging
`unit between projecting
`and retracted positions
`relative to a frame
`(claim 1, 11. 12-15)
`
`a) Lifting column 46 having linear hydraulic
`lifting column actuator 62 (with piston rod
`64 within cylinder 66) moving inner tubular
`member 58 vertically within outer tubular
`member 60 to raise and lower ground
`engaging unit 20 (col. 4, 11. 51-53; col. 5, 11.
`32-53).
`b) Swing arm 76 having first end portion 78
`pivoted to frame 12 by pivot pin 80 and
`second end portion 82 connected to outer
`tubular member 60 to allow/provide for
`movement of ground engaging unit 20
`between projecting and retracted positions
`relative to frame 12 (col. 6, 11. 12-22).
`
`2 Claims 1 and 36 are addressed because requester requests reexamination of claims 16 and 43, which
`depend from and incorporate the subject matter of claims 1 and 36, respectively.
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 12 of 110 PageID #: 40543
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 9
`
`controller
`(claim 1, 1. 25;
`claim 36, 1. 2)
`
`anti-rotate
`device
`(claim 16;
`claim 43)
`
`A programmed computer logic unit (col. 4, 11.
`18-20) that is suitably programmed to receive
`inputs and produce desired outputs (col. 6, 11.
`56-64), and that may be a separate control unit
`or part of a central control unit (col. 7, 11. 36-
`39).
`
`a) maintain the same
`rotational direction of
`at least one ground
`engaging unit in each
`of projecting and
`retracted positions
`(claim 1, 11. 22-24) by
`To perform the claimed functions, the computer
`coordinating the
`logic unit is programmed to (i) receive a pivot
`actuation of the first
`command from a pivot switch, (ii) determine
`and second actuators
`that certain safety criteria are satisfied, (iii)
`(claim 1, 11. 25-26)
`activate anti-swing actuator 85 to release
`b) control engagement of
`protrusion 86 from one receptacle 88, (iv)
`an anti-rotate device
`activate anti-rotate actuator 98 to release
`(claim 16)
`protrusion 102 from one receptacle 96, (v)
`c) control a pair of
`actuate first actuator 42 to begin pivotal
`actuators (claim 36, 11.
`movement of swing arm 76, (vi) track such
`1-2) by actuating a
`pivotal movement using pivot position inputs
`second actuator in a
`from pivot sensor 83, (vii) actuate second
`manner coordinated
`actuator 44 to counter-rotate ground engaging
`with actuation of a
`unit 20, (viii) track such counter-rotation using
`first actuator to
`rotation position inputs from rotation sensor 75,
`maintain the same
`(ix) coordinate activation of actuators 42, 44
`rotational direction of
`a ground engaging unit using the pivot and rotation position inputs to
`in each of projecting
`maintain the same rotational direction of ground
`and retracted positions
`engaging unit 20 in each of the projecting and
`(claim 36, 11. 14-19)
`retracted positions, (x) determine that pivoting
`and rotation are complete based on the pivot
`and rotation position inputs, (xi) activate anti-
`swing actuator 85 to engage protrusion 86 with
`another receptacle 88, and (xii) activate anti-
`rotate actuator 98 to engage protrusion 102 with
`another receptacle 96 (col. 8, 11. 18-65; col. 9, 11.
`12-14).
`Collar 92 on inner tubular member 58, and anti-
`rotate actuator 98 moving protrusion 102 into
`and out of engagement with receptacles 96 on
`collar 92 so as to provide anti-rotation in the
`projecting and retracted positions of grounding
`engaging unit 20 (col. 6, 11. 38-55).
`
`provide anti-rotation via
`controlled engagement of
`a protrusion with
`receptacles
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 13 of 110 PageID #: 40544
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 10
`
`support means
`(claim 45, 1. 4)
`
`a) support a machine
`frame (claim 45, 1. 4)
`b) be connected to a frame
`(claim 45, 1. 5) to allow/
`provide movement of at
`least one ground
`engaging unit between
`projecting and retracted
`positions relative to the
`frame (claim 45, 11. 5
`and 9-11)
`
`first actuatable move at least one ground
`means
`engaging unit between
`(claim 45, 1. 9) projecting and retracted
`positions relative to a
`frame (claim 45, 11. 9-11)
`
`second
`actuatable
`means
`(claim 45, 1.
`12)
`
`rotate at least one ground
`engaging unit to maintain
`the same rotational
`direction of at least one
`ground engaging unit in
`each of projecting and
`retracted positions (claim
`45, 11. 12-15)
`
`a) Lifting column 46 having linear hydraulic
`lifting column actuator 62 moving inner
`tubular member 58 vertically within outer
`tubular member 60 to raise and lower ground
`engaging unit 20 (col. 4, 11. 51-53; col. 5, 11.
`32-53).
`b) Swing arm 76 having first end portion 78
`pivoted to frame 12 by pivot pin 80 and
`second end portion 82 connected to outer
`tubular member 60 to allow/provide for
`movement of ground engaging unit 20
`between projecting and retracted positions
`relative to frame 12 (col. 6, 11. 12-22).
`First actuator 42 connected to support device 40
`and adapted to move ground engaging unit 20
`between projecting and retracted positions
`relative to frame 12 (col. 4, 11. 40-44). Actuator
`42 can be:
`a) A linear actuator having a first end
`connected to frame 12 and a second end
`connected to swing arm 72 (Figs. 3-4;
`claims 12, 30 and 58).
`b) A rotary actuator (col. 4, 1. 61 to col. 5, 1.
`7; col. 5,11. 17-19).
`Second actuator 44 associated with support
`device 40 and adapted to maintain the same
`rotational direction of ground engaging unit 20
`in each of projecting and retracted positions
`(col. 4, 11. 44-47). In the preferred embodiment,
`actuator 44 is a rotary actuator connected to
`upper portion 50 of lifting column 46 to cause
`rotation of lifting actuator cylinder 66 and inner
`tubular member 58 (col. 4, 1. 56 to col. 5, 1. 24;
`col. 5, 1. 54 to col. 6, 1. 6). In IPR2022-01394
`(discussed above), the PTAB ruled the
`disclosure identifies the corresponding structure
`as either a rotary or linear actuator and does
`require such actuator to be positioned at a top
`portion of the lifting column. Essentially the
`same construction was adopted by the US
`District Court for the District of Delaware
`(discussed above). Actuator 44 is controlled by
`the disclosed programmed computer logic unit
`(discussed above) to maintain the same
`rotational direction of ground engaging unit 20
`in each of projecting and retracted positions.
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 14 of 110 PageID #: 40545
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 11
`
`a)
`
`controller
`means
`(claim 45, 1.
`18) including a
`programmable
`logic device
`(claim 60)
`
`coordinate actuation of
`first and second
`actuators (claim 45, 11.
`18-20) so as to maintain
`the same rotational
`direction of at least one
`ground engaging unit in
`each of projecting and
`retracted positions
`(claim 45, 11. 13-15)
`
`b) receive an alignment
`signal from a rotation
`sensor and responsively
`actuate the second
`actuator to maintain the
`rotational direction of at
`least one ground
`engaging unit (claim
`50)
`receive an alignment
`signal from a rotation
`sensor and a position
`signal from a pivot
`sensor, and
`responsively coordinate
`actuation of first and
`second actuators in a
`predetermined manner
`(claim 52)
`
`d) controllably actuate a
`second actuator to
`rotate at least one
`ground engaging unit
`about a lifting column
`axis in response to a
`pivot sensor position
`signal and a steering
`command element
`(claim 54)
`controllably actuate a
`second actuator to
`rotate at least one
`ground engaging unit in
`a first manner when in
`the projecting position,
`and in a second
`
`c)
`
`e)
`
`A programmed computer logic unit (col. 4, 11.
`18-20) that is suitably programmed to receive
`inputs and produce desired outputs (col. 6, 11.
`56-64), and that may be a separate control unit
`or part of a central control unit (col. 7, 11. 36-
`39).
`
`To perform the functions required by claims 45,
`50 and 52, the computer logic unit is
`programmed to (i) receive a pivot command
`from a pivot switch, (ii) determine certain
`safety criteria are satisfied, (iii) activate anti-
`swing actuator 85 to release protrusion 86 from
`one receptacle 88, (iv) activate anti-rotate
`actuator 98 to release protrusion 102 from one
`receptacle 96, (v) actuate first actuator 42 to
`begin pivotal movement of swing arm 76, (vi)
`track such pivotal movement using pivot
`position inputs from pivot sensor 83, (vii)
`actuate second actuator 44 to counter-rotate
`ground engaging unit 20, (viii) track such
`counter-rotation using rotation position inputs
`from rotation sensor 75, (ix) coordinate
`activation of actuators 42, 44 using the pivot
`and rotation position inputs to maintain the
`same rotational direction of ground engaging
`unit 20 in each of the projecting and retracted
`positions, (x) determine that pivoting and
`rotation are complete based on the pivot and
`rotation position inputs, (xi) activate anti-swing
`actuator 85 to engage protrusion 86 with
`another receptacle 88, and (xii) activate anti-
`rotate actuator 98 to engage protrusion 102 with
`another receptacle 96 (col. 8, 11. 18-65; col. 9, 11.
`12-14).
`
`To perform the functions required by claims 54-
`56, the computer logic unit is programmed to (i)
`deactivate anti-rotate actuator 98 (i.e., release
`protrusion 102 from receptacles 96), (ii) receive
`steering command signals from steering
`command element 26, (iii) actuate second
`actuator 44 to produce calculated steering
`angles of ground engaging unit 20 when in the
`retracted position, and (iv) calculate and control
`the correct steering angles in accordance with
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 15 of 110 PageID #: 40546
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`Page 12
`
`different manner when
`in the retracted position
`(claim 55)
`f) actuate a second
`actuator in a manner
`adapted to provide
`Ackerman corrected
`steer angles for at least
`one ground engaging
`unit (claim 56)
`produce an alignment
`signal indicative of the
`rotational position of one
`ground engaging unit
`relative to the frame, and
`deliver the alignment
`signal to the controller
`(claim 49)
`produce a position signal
`indicative of the position
`of at least one ground
`engaging unit relative to
`the frame between the
`projecting and retracted
`positions, and deliver the
`position signal to the
`controller (claim 51)
`produce a steering
`command (claim 54, 11. 1-
`2) received and acted on
`by controller (claim 54, 11.
`3-7)
`prevent pivotal movement
`of a swing arm in response
`to at least one ground
`engaging unit being
`positioned at one of the
`projecting and retracted
`positions (claim 61)
`prevent rotational
`movement of at least one
`ground engaging unit in
`response to the ground
`engaging unit being
`aligned with the frame and
`being positioned at one of
`
`rotation sensor
`means
`(claim 49)
`
`pivot sensor
`means
`(claims 51 and
`63)
`
`steering
`command
`element
`(claim 54, 11.
`1-2)
`anti-swing
`means
`(claim 61)
`
`anti-rotate
`means
`(claim 62)
`
`the Ackerman principle when ground engaging
`unit 20 is in the projecting position (col. 4, 11.
`16-24 and 30-37; col. 9, 11. 15-42).
`
`Rotation sensor 75, such as a rotary encoder,
`delivering signals (to controller 32)
`representing the rotation angle of ground
`engaging unit 20 relative to frame 12, with
`rotation sensor 75 being associated with (i)
`second actuator 44, or (ii) a connected rotating
`component (col. 6, 11. 6-11; col. 7, 11. 23-27).
`
`Pivot sensor 83 delivering signals (to controller
`32) representing the pivot angle of swing arm
`76 relative to frame 12, with pivot sensor 83
`being (i) a linear sensor associated with first
`actuator 42, or (ii) a rotary encoder associated
`with pivot pin 80 (col. 6, 11. 22-26; col. 7, 11. 19-
`23).
`
`A steering wheel or joystick (col. 3, 11. 59-62)
`whose motion is detected using a transducer to
`sense the desired steering motion, with steering
`command signals delivered to controller 32
`(col. 4,11. 11-24; col. 6,11. 65-66; col. 7,11. 4-5).
`Anti-swing actuator 85 moving protrusion 86
`into and out of engagement with receptacles 88
`on frame 12 so as to prevent pivotal movement
`of swing arm 76 in the projecting and retracted
`positions of grounding engaging unit 20 (col. 6,
`11. 27-37).
`
`Collar 92 on inner tubular member 58, and anti-
`rotate actuator 98 moving protrusion 102 into
`and out of engagement with receptacles 96 on
`collar 92 so as to prevent rotational movement
`of inner tubular member 58 in the projecting
`and retracted positions of grounding engaging
`unit 20 (col. 6, 11. 38-55).
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 439-24 Filed 07/31/24 Page 16 of 110 PageID #: 40547
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/019,472
`Art Unit: 3993
`
`the projecting and
`retracted positions (claim
`62)
`
`Page 13
`
`15.
`
`The following claim terms are interpreted as invoking 35 USC 112 1 6:
`
`• Ground engaging units (claim 1, 11. 2-3; claim 36, 11. 3-4; claim 45, 11. 2-3)
`
`invokes 112 1 6 because (i) units is a generic placeholder for structure, (ii) ground
`
`engaging refers to a function to be performed, and (iii) the corresponding
`
`structure (i.e., wheels or track sections adapted to revolve in forward and reverse
`
`directions) is not recited in claims 1, 36 and 45. Such a generic placeholder,
`
`which is defined by the function(s) it performs, fails to recite sufficiently definite
`
`structure and/or sufficient structure for performing the claimed function.
`
`• Support device (claim 1, 1. 4) invokes 112 1 6 because (i) device is a generic
`
`placeholder for structure, (ii) support refers to a function to be performed, and (iii)
`
`part of the corresponding structure (i.e., the swing arm) is not recited in claim 1.
`
`• Controller (claim 1, 1. 25; claim 36, 1. 2) invokes 112 1 6 because (i) controller is a
`
`generic placeholder for a computer-implemented controller having special
`
`programming, (ii) the controller is claimed based on the functions it performs, and
`
`(iii) the corresponding structure (i.e., the particular computer-implemented
`
`controller having the special programming required to achieve the claimed
`
`functions) is not recited in claims 1 and 36.
`
`• Anti-rotate device (claims 16 and 43) invokes 112 1 6 because (i) device is a
`
`generic placeholder for structure, (ii) anti-rotate refers to a function to be
`
`performed, and (iii) the corresponding structure (i.e., the anti-rotate actuator 98
`
`moving protrusion 102 into and out of engagement with receptacles 96 on collar
`
`92) is not recited in claims 16 and 43.
`
`• Support means (claim 45, 1. 4) invokes 112 1 6 because (i) means is a generic
`
`placeholder for structure, (ii) support refers to a function to be performed, and (iii)
`
`pa