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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/29/2026 with regards to Claim 14 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The amendments presented as they relate to Claim 14 are disclosed as detailed below. In the interest of compact prosecution, Examiner wishes to respond to specific arguments made.
Applicant argues that the structures for the lifting mechanism constitute significantly differences as they relate to the upper and lower supports. Examiner agrees that the structure for the vehicle mount are significantly different, however, the claim is not so specific as to require the express details for the mounting bracket as seen in exemplary figure 7. To read the claims as requiring such a specific feature would be to improperly import limitations from the specification into the claims in contradiction of instant paragraph 0038.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The recitation of “is disposed on the fame” should read --is disposed on the frame--
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dugan et al., U.S. Patent 6,884,018, hereinafter referred to as Dugan.
Regarding Claim 14, Dugan discloses a platform for connecting to mounting structure of a machine for supporting a vehicle on the machine, the platform comprising:
A frame (the plate defined by ends 63 and 53, see Figure 1);
At least one guide supported by the frame, the guide configured to receive at least one wheel of a vehicle to thereby position the vehicle on the frame (yoke mechanism, 65 for holding a vehicle in place; Paragraph bridging Cols 3 and 4);
A mount coupled to the frame and configured to connect the frame to a front housing of a machine in place of an attachment to the machine (as seen in Figures 2 and 3, generic mounting element 13 includes elements to connect to a front mount bar of the vehicle 37 through vehicle mount elements 23), the mount includes:
An upper support having a face portion defining an opening configured to receive a lug of the from housing of the machine (as seen in Figure 7, outer portion 25 includes an opening for receiving a lug 81 from the machine to mount the frame in place);
A lower support disposed generally below the face portion of the upper support (mounting pins 75/73 at terminal ends of arms 69/73 are used to attach the mounting block to the platform; Cp; 4. limes 7-33); and
First and second sides extending between and connecting the upper support and lower support (defined as the sides of connecting arms 83 as seen in Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Dugan further discloses that the at least one guide includes a first guide and a second guide, the first guide is disposed on the frame generally parallel to the second guide (as seen in Figure 1, the guide frame includes parallel extension portions both on the base as well as those angled upwardly to form the wheel well).
Regarding Claim 16, Dugan further discloses that the at least one wheel of the vehicle includes multiple wheels (as seen in phantom lines in Figure 5) and wherein the first and second guides each define a track configured to allow ones of the multiple wheels to roll along a surface of the track (in so far as the the guides are configured to engage the wheels of the vehicle to cradle them to transport; Col 3, Line 60 – Col 4, Line 7).
Regarding Claim 17, Dugan further discloses that each of the first and second guides includes multiple rings defining the corresponding track of the first and second guides (in so far as the parallel segments includes a flat portion against the platform and an angled portion to help cradle the wheel as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 18, Dugan further discloses that the at least one guide extends beyond the frame to thereby provide a ramp portion for positioning the vehicle on the frame (in so far as the guide may be seen as including loading ramp end 57 as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 19, Dugan further discloses that the frame defines a generally rectangular shape (as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 20, Dugan further discloses that the machine may take the form of a loader (absent more explicit structural detail regarding the features of a loader, a standard vehicle for general transport would appear to fall under the BRI for such a feature). Examiner additionally notes that absent some specific structural feature for the connecting of the mount to the vehicle, it would appear that the type of vehicle has only minimal impact on the scope of the claim. When compared to Claims 1 or 10 for example, which specify the connection as it relates to the header/feeder house elements of a combine, Claim 20 constitutes a significantly broader claim structure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6, 8, 10, and 12 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA whose telephone number is (571)272-0547. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am-3pm (Central).
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, Joe Thomas can be reached at 571-272-8004. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights