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 .
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. Accordingly, in claim 1, the term "in the form of" (in "a linkage ... in the form of a first linkage ... and a second linkage ...") is interpreted to be inclusive or open-ended and to not exclude additional, unrecited elements, particularly in light of the specification wherein the linkage includes multiple parts (e.g., see Specification, paras. 0053-0056). As such, "in the form of" is interpreted to be synonymous with "comprising" or "including" in the context of claim 1.
Selections of "sections" and/or "portions" as claimed (e.g. in claims 1 and 11) are effectively arbitrary because these sections and/or portions are not specifically defined by or for the claims. Further, the specification does not indicate that limitations thereof must be read into the claims. Rather, the specification recites: "The toolbars provided can take different forms and/or lengths, and can be separated into additional portions as well as those shown herein. Additional variations, replacements, and/or alternatives to any or all of the components shown and/or described should be considered a part of the invention and obvious to those skilled int the art." (See Specification, para. 0064.) Additionally, the specification does not include a special definition for either "section" or "portion."
In claims 1 and 11, "a portion of the outer wing sections being rearward of the center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue" is interpreted to require a portion of the outer wing sections being rearward of only a portion of "the center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue."
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-11, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Friesen et al. (US 5,113,956)
Regarding claim 1, Friesen discloses an agricultural implement, comprising:
a tongue (including 28, 36, and center wheels shown along 72 in Fig. 2) comprising a hitch (including 36) at a first end and one or more transport wheels (including center wheels shown along 72 in Fig. 2) at a second end; and
a toolbar at the second end of the tongue, said toolbar extending substantially perpendicular to the tongue in a field use configuration (see Fig. 1), the toolbar comprising:
a center wing section comprising a center toolbar portion (including 22 and 72) that is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the tongue (see Figs. 8-10, wherein a dimension of 22 is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of 28 and/or 36; and the length of 72 is perpendicular to the length of 28 and/or 36, as seen from Figs. 2, 9, and 10);
first and second outer wing sections (including 68 and including 70) extending outward from opposite sides of the center wing section in the field use configuration (see Fig. 1); and
a linkage (including 80', 80, 95', and 95) between each of the outer wing sections and the center wing section in the form of a first linkage (including 80' and 95') between the first outer wing section (including 68) and the center wing section (see Figs. 1 and 2) and a second linkage (including 80 and 95) between the second out wing section (including 70) and the center wing (see Figs. 1 and 2), said first and second linkages operable to rotate the outer wing sections forward about a substantially vertical axis (see Figs. 1 and 2) and also translating the outer wing sections in a rearward direction (68 and 70 translating rearwardly relative to at least 14 and 36) with a portion of the outer wing sections being rearward of the center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue (68 and 70 extending rearward of at least a front portion of 22 in Fig. 2, wherein "at least a front portion of 22" is part of "a center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue" including 22 and 72).
Regarding claim 2, Friesen discloses at least one actuator (32) between the tongue (including 28, 36, and center wheels shown along 72 in Fig. 2) and the center wing section (including 22 and 72; 32 being between 36 and 22) to rotate the toolbar about a substantially horizontal axis (at 30; see Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, Friesen discloses the substantially horizontal axis of rotation (at 30) for the toolbar extending substantially perpendicular to the length of the tongue (see Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 4, Friesen discloses extension of the at least one actuator (32) rotating the toolbar vertically about the substantially horizontal axis of rotation (at 30; see Fig. 9; the toolbar rotating vertically with respect to the tongue about 30).
Regarding claim 5, Friesen discloses the first linkage comprising an extendable actuator (including 80') and a fixed length arm (including 95'), and the second linkage comprising an extendable actuator (including 80) and a fixed length arm (including 95), with the first linkage (including 80' and 95') rotatably connected to the first outer wing section (including 68) and the center wing section (including 22 and 72), and the second linkage (including 80 and 95) rotatably connected to the second outer wing section (including 70) and the center wing section (including 22 and 72).
Regarding claim 6, Friesen discloses retraction of the respective extendable actuators (including 80' and including 80) of the first and second linkages rotates the outer wing sections (including 68 and including 70) forward toward the tongue (see Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 7, Friesen discloses the outer wing sections comprising wing wheels (including outer wheels shown along 68 and 70 in Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 8, Friesen discloses the center wing section (including 22 and 72) comprising a frame (including 72).
Regarding claim 9, Friesen discloses the first and second linkages (including 80', 80, 95', and 95) being connected between the outer wing sections and the frame of the center wing section (see Figs. 1 and 2, wherein 80' is connected between 68 and 72, and 80 is connected between 70 and 72).
Regarding claim 10, Friesen discloses the first and second outer wing sections (including 68 and including 70) being substantially parallel to the tongue in a transport configuration (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Friesen discloses an agricultural implement, comprising:
a tongue (including 28, 36, and center wheels shown along 72 in Fig. 2) comprising a hitch (including 36) at a first end and one or more transport wheels (including center wheels shown along 72 in Fig. 2) at a second end; and
a toolbar at the second end of the tongue, said toolbar extending substantially perpendicular to the tongue in a field use configuration (see Fig. 1), the toolbar comprising:
a center wing section comprising a center toolbar portion (including 22 and 72) that is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the tongue (see Figs. 8-10, wherein a dimension of 22 is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of 28 and/or 36; and the length of 72 is perpendicular to the length of 28 and/or 36, as seen from Figs. 2, 9, and 10); and
first and second outer wing sections (including 68 and including 70) extending outward from opposite sides of the center wing section in the field use configuration (see Fig. 1); and
a toolbar rotation system comprising:
a center linkage including an actuator (32) to rotate the toolbar about a generally horizontal axis (at 30); and
first and second wing linkages including actuators (including 80' and including 80) to rotate the first and second outer wing sections in a forward manner relative to the center wing section (see Figs. 1 and 2) wherein the first and second outer wings also translate in a rearward direction during rotation in the forward manner (68 and 70 translating rearwardly relative to at least 14 and 36), and
wherein, in a transport configuration, the first and second outer wing sections (including 68 and 70) include portions that are rearward of the center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue (68 and 70 extending rearward of at least a front portion of 22 in Fig. 2, wherein "at least a front portion of 22" is part of "a center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue" including 22 and 72).
Regarding claim 13, Friesen discloses the first and second outer wings (including 68 and including 70) being substantially parallel to the tongue in the transport configuration (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, Friesen discloses the first and second wing linkages (including 80' and including 80) rotating the first and second outer wings about a substantially vertical axis (as at 92; see Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 16, Friesen discloses the first and second outer wing sections (including 68 and including 70) being substantially parallel to the center wing section (see Fig. 1) during rotation of the center linkage (when 32 is operated in the field use configuration).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see labeled pp. 6-7, filed 7/6/2026, with respect to § 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The § 1 of 3/26/2026 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's other arguments filed 7/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as set forth in the following explanations.
Regarding claim interpretation, Applicant argues: "While broadest reasonable interpretation is the standard, Applicant questions the reasonableness of the examination and construction of the claims, and would suggest that the reasonableness is being stretched to allow the rejections to conform to the reference, and not the reference to the rejection." (See Remarks of 7/6/2026, labeled p. 7.) Applicant also argues: "Therefore, it is even clearer now, even assuming the unreasonably broad interpretation of the claims in view of Friesen, that the claimed invention is structurally different than the reference." (See Remarks of 7/6/2026, labeled p. 8.)
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim interpretation are unpersuasive because they amount to a general allegation that fails to set forth what interpretation is unreasonable, let alone explain why any interpretation is unreasonable.
Regarding Friesen, Applicant argues: "As shown, the vertical line [in the annotated figure of Friesen on labeled p. 9 in the Remarks of 7/6/2026] is the line of the central toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the highlighted tongue. However, there is no portion of the outer wings that extend rearward of this perpendicular portion." (See Remarks of 7/6/2026.)
Applicant's argument is unpersuasive because it is based on a hypothetical rejection (i.e., a rejection that appears to be considering only element 66 of Friesen as the center wing section) that has not been made. In response to such a hypothetical, Examiner notes that the term "center toolbar portion" is interpreted to include center portions of what the prior art (e.g., Friesen) describes as portions of a "tool bar." (E.g., see Friesen, col. 3, lines 5-7.) As stated in the 'Claim Interpretation' section above, selections of "portions" (as well as "sections") as claimed are effectively arbitrary because these portions (and/or sections) are not specifically defined by or for the claims. Also, the specification does not indicate that limitations thereof must be read into the claims. Rather, the specification recites: "The toolbars provided can take different forms and/or lengths, and can be separated into additional portions as well as those shown herein. Additional variations, replacements, and/or alternatives to any or all of the components shown and/or described should be considered a part of the invention and obvious to those skilled int the art." (See Specification, para. 0064.) The specification does not include a special definition for either "portion" or "section."
Additionally, Examiner notes that claims 1 and 11 each recite "a center toolbar portion that is perpendicular..." but do not specify "a longitudinal direction" or "a length" of the center toolbar portion being perpendicular. Such limitations (i.e., of "a longitudinal direction" or "a length" of the center toolbar portion) are not read into the claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Finally, Examiner notes, as also set forth in the 'Claim Interpretation' section above, that "a portion of the outer wing sections being rearward of the center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue" (in claims 1 and 11) is interpreted to require a portion of the outer wing sections being rearward of only a portion of "the center toolbar portion that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tongue." A portion of the outer wing sections being rearward of "all of" or "an entirety of" said center toolbar portion is neither claimed nor required by the claims. Again, such limitations (here regarding rearward positioning) are not read into the claims.
Claims 2-10, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected as being anticipated by the prior art because Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 are unpersuasive, and the limitations of claims 1-11, 13, 15, and 16 are met by the prior art as set forth in the rejection above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Thielicke et al. (EP 1859665 A1) discloses a toolbar having sections that translate and extend rearwardly as claimed. Although Thielicke does not explicitly disclose wheels of the tongue (as in claims 1 and 11) or an actuator (as in claims 2 and/or 11), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the implement of Thielicke with these features in order to transport the implement (e.g., over roads) and to raise and lower tools during operation, respectively.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joel F. Mitchell whose telephone number is (571)272-7689. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6:00.
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at (571)272-0547. 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.
/JFM/9/26/26
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
