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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the purge port of claim 3 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2-5, line 1 “A mulching apparatus according to” should be -- The mulching apparatus according to--.
Claim 4, line 3 “a rotor” should be –the rotor--. It is noted that a rotor of the mulching apparatus is positively set forth in claim 1, line 3.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: MULCHING APPARATUS WITH REMOVABLE WEAR COMPONENTS.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isley (US 20140212212 A1) in view of Chesack et al. (US 5896734 A).
Regarding claim 1, Isley discloses a mulching apparatus (50) comprising:
a housing comprising a front opening and an inner wall (Fig. 4);
a rotor (10) mounted in the front opening of the housing adjacent to the inner wall; and
a drive train (9) for driving the rotor, the drive train comprising:
a drive shaft (25) connected to the rotor;
a motor (12) comprising a motor shaft (24).
Isley does not disclose a removable wear gear connecting the motor shaft and the drive shaft, wherein the wear gear is formed from a material that is softer than a material of the drive shaft or motor shaft.
Chesack at Fig. 4 discloses a drive arrangement for the rotor of a reel mower, wherein the motor shaft (49) and the rotor drive shaft (22) are connected via a removable wear gear (27) such that impacts between the motor shaft and drive shaft are absorbed by the removable wear gear, which can be replaced without having to replace either of the more expensive shafts it interconnects (Chesack at C3,L60-C4,L6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the drive connection of Isley to include a removable wear gear between the motor shaft and rotor drive shaft, as taught by Chesack, in order to provide a replaceable wear medium for absorbing shocks and preventing damage to the shafts (Chesack at C3,L60-C4,L6). It would have been further obvious to design the wear gear of a softer material than the shafts as Isley discloses that it is advantageous to design gear couplings of a flexible material for improved shock absorbance (para. [0019-0021]).
Regarding claim 2, Isley/Chesack discloses the mulching apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the drive shaft further comprises an axial bore (32) in fluid communication with the wear gear for introducing a lubrication fluid thereto (Isley at para. [0024] discloses an axial bore 32 which serves as a reservoir for introducing grease or other lubricant).
Regarding claim 3, Isley/Chesack discloses the mulching apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the drive train further comprises a purge port (34) in fluid communication with the axial bore (Isley at para. [0028] discloses a grease relief port 34 that is configured to open when the pressure within passage 32 reaches a set value).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daining et al. (US 20150250087 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Daining discloses a mulching apparatus (90) comprising:
a housing (102) comprising a front opening and an inner wall (Fig. 2);
a rotor (104) mounted in the front opening of the housing adjacent to the inner wall; and
a drive train (106, Fig. 6-7) for driving the rotor, the drive train comprising:
a drive shaft (146) connected to the rotor;
a motor (140) comprising a motor shaft (150);
a removable wear gear (184) connecting the motor shaft and the drive shaft (para. [009]).
Daining does not explicitly teach wherein the wear gear is formed from a material that is softer than a material of the drive shaft or motor shaft.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the wear gear of a softer material than the shafts, in order to allow for good shock absorption performance. Note that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious engineering design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is also common knowledge to choose a material that has sufficient strength, durability, flexibility, hardness, etc. for the application and intended use of that material.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isley/Chesack OR Daining as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Denis (US 20110042499 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Isley/Chesack or Daining discloses the mulching apparatus according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose a wear liner on the inner wall as claimed.
In the same field of mulching drums, Denis at Figs. 2-4 discloses a replaceable wear liner (25) configured to fit around the inner wall (7) of a cutting drum housing, the wear liner having a plurality of slots (41) at an upper end (43) of the body and a plurality of fastening holes (37) at a lower end (39) of the body.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a similar wear liner in the housing of Isley or Daining, in order to protect the inner wall from extensive wear due to materials being thrown against the wall during cutting operation (Denis at para. [0026]).
With regards to the liner having a lower flange extending rearward from the body, Denis at Para. [0020] further states that “The liner 25 can be pre-shaped to fit snugly against the inner surface 23 of the cover 7 or it can be flexible and bent to abut the inner surface 23 during installation”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a rearwardly extending lower flange, in order to provide an alternate shape for conforming the wear liner to the inner wall.
Note that those of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that a modification such as a mere change in shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Additionally, the lower flange on Applicant’s wear liner does not provide any different or unexpected result over the wear liner of the prior art.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isley/Chesack or Daining as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wulfers (US 4306409 A) or Schafer (US 20100147984 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Isley/Chesack or Daining discloses the mulching apparatus according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach a chain assembly as claimed.
Wulfers teaches that it was old and well-known to provide a chain assembly on mulching devices to act as a uniform wall that prevents debris from escaping the comminuting apparatus (C3,L41-46). Wulfers further teaches wherein the chain assembly comprises a plurality of chains (14), a chain mounting plate (16) comprising a plurality of chain holders (26) each supporting an individual chain, and a chain support plate (28) removably attached to the chain mounting plate to hold the plurality of chains on the chain holders of the chain mounting plate (C3,L47-C4,L18).
Schafer also discloses a plurality of chains (28) and chain holders (32) attached to a mounting plate (30) which “serve to stop chips from flying out of the device at high velocity when in operation” (para. [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the mulching apparatus to include a chain assembly, similar to that of Wulfers or Schafer, in order to prevent debris from flying backwardly out of the mulching apparatus.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schafer (US 20040244869 A1) discloses a mulching apparatus having a chain assembly for reducing deflected material. Everett (US 20060156704 A1) discloses an apparatus for reducing vegetation and a chain assembly for reducing deflected material. Mensch (US 20060243463 A1) discloses a drive arrangement for a rotatable drum. Thompson (US 20080072997 A1) discloses a drive arrangement for a land clearing apparatus. Labbe et al. (US 20090044508 A1) discloses a drive arrangement for a brush clearing apparatus. Trevillyan et al. (US 20100115903 A1) discloses a drive system for a flail mower. Dougherty (US 10882051 B1) discloses a mulching drum with chain for deflecting flying material.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA C TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8758. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5 EST.
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, Tom Will, can be reached on (571) 272-6998. 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 httos://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 B WILL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/JULIA C TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights