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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The reasons for allowance for claims 10-12 put forth in previous Office Actions still apply.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
While the new amendments have overcome the 102 rejection of Brummelhuis, the independent claim appears to detail further structure of the row unit as a whole rather than the inventive row cleaner assembly. As such, Examiner has presented new reference Sivinski to show that merely adding detail to the opening assembly of the row unit is not inventive. Row units are mechanisms that have sub components (e.g. opening assembly with disks and gauge wheels, or a row cleaner mechanism). Amending the claims to detail the opener assembly is modifying an adjacent system to the inventive row cleaner; using teachings from the prior art to modify subcomponents of a row unit is considered to be obvious. Therefore, Examiner has presented a new rejection to the claims using Sivinski in view of Brummelhuis.
Brummelhuis is still considered a pertinent piece of prior art with regard to the row cleaner assembly. As detailed more below, Sivinski discloses a row unit with an opener assembly as now claimed and Brummelhuis provides teaching of the row cleaner subcomponent as claimed. The row cleaner subcomponent appears to be largely unchanged in newly amended claim 1. Applicant’s arguments drawn to Brummelhuis are considered moot as Sivinski is now relied upon for the argued claim language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sivinski (US 20190281756) in further view of Brummelhuis (US 20020078869).
Regarding claim 1, Sivinski discloses an agricultural row cleaner assembly, comprising:
a mounting assembly configured to connect to a toolbar of an agricultural planter forward of a planter row unit relative to a forward direction of travel of the planter row unit (Fig 6A of Sivinski; mounting assembly 16), the planter row unit having including:
a row unit frame supported rearward of the toolbar (20); and
an opening assembly supported from the row unit frame (Fig 2A), the opening assembly including:
a first opener disk and a second opener disk, configured to open a seed trench in a soil surface as the agricultural planter travels in the forward direction of travel (pair of disc openers 22; para [0077], line 6);
a first opener gauge wheel arm rotatably supporting a first opener gauge wheel adjacent the first opener disk; and
a second opener gauge wheel arm rotatably supporting a second opener gauge wheel adjacent the second opener disk (pair of disc gauge wheels 24 depicted adjacent in Fig 2A; para [0077], line 6);
a cleaner assembly (10).
a linkage arrangement operably supporting the first and second row cleaner wheel arms and the row cleaner gauge wheel axle from the mounting assembly (linkages 32 and 50); and
an actuator connected with the linkage arrangement, such that when the actuator is actuated, the actuator causes a change in downforce applied by the row cleaner gauge wheel to the soil surface (actuator 56 changes the downforce on the gauge wheels 100).
Sivinski discloses a different cleaner assembly and fails to specifically disclose the row cleaner with first and second row cleaner wheel arms and row cleaner gauge wheel as currently claimed.
Brummelhuis discloses a similar agricultural row cleaner assembly with a mounting assembly (Fig 1/Fig 12; connection at 40), a linkage arrangement to support row cleaner wheel arms and row cleaner gauge wheel (linkage 6), and an actuator (5). Brummelhuis further teaches:
a first row cleaner wheel arm supporting a first row cleaner wheel rotatable about a first row cleaner wheel axle (front arm 10 with first wheel 2 rotatable about axle with axis A1; Fig 12 300C);
a second row cleaner wheel arm supporting a second row cleaner wheel rotatable about a second row cleaner wheel axle (arm 14 with second wheel 4 rotatable about axle with axis A2; Fig 12 300C);
a row cleaner gauge wheel disposed between the first row cleaner wheel arm and the second row cleaner wheel arm and rotatably supported on a row cleaner gauge wheel axle, the row cleaner gauge wheel axle disposed rearward of the first and second row cleaner wheel axles (gauge wheel 8 is disposed between the row cleaner arms and rotatable about axle with axis WA; 300C of Fig 12 depicts the row cleaner gauge wheel axle disposed rearward of the first and second row cleaner wheel axles).
Sivinski and Brummelhuis are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of agricultural row units with row cleaner mechanisms. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sivinski and replaced the cleaner assembly with the analogous row cleaner assembly with row cleaner arms and row cleaner gauge wheel of Brummelhuis. One would have made this modification as a simple substitution of one known row cleaner assembly of a row unit for another to obtain predicable results.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis discloses the agricultural row cleaner assembly wherein the linkage arrangement comprises:
a four bar linkage including an upper right bar, a lower right bar, an upper left bar, and a lower left bar (Sivinski; Figs 1-2 depict upper linkage pair 32 and lower linkage pair 50).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis discloses the agricultural row cleaner assembly further including:
a right rear strut (Sivinski; 38); and
a left rear strut (Sivinski; 38); and
wherein:
the first row cleaner wheel arm is pivotably connected to the right rear strut;
the second row cleaner wheel arm is pivotably connected to the left rear strut (the first and second row cleaner wheel arms of the combination are pivotably connected to the struts; Sivinski even depicts cleaner wheel arms 136 that are pivotably connected to the struts in Fig 8);
the upper right bar and the lower right bar are pivotally connected to the right rear strut;
the upper left bar and the lower left bar are pivotally connected to the left rear strut (Sivinski Fig 6A; pivotal connections between the struts and each pair of linkages are at 40 and 54).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis discloses the agricultural row cleaner assembly further including:
a right rear strut (Sivinski; 38); and
a left rear strut (Sivinski; 38); and
wherein:
the right rear strut is pivotally supported from the first row cleaner wheel arm;
the left rear strut is pivotally supported from the second row cleaner wheel arm (the first and second row cleaner wheel arms of the combination are pivotably connected to the struts; Sivinski even depicts cleaner wheel arms 136 that are pivotably connected to the struts in Fig 8);
the upper right bar and the lower right bar are pivotally connected to the first row cleaner wheel arm;
the upper left bar and the lower left bar are pivotally connected to the second row cleaner wheel arm (Sivinski Fig 6A; each pair of linkages are pivotally connected to each row cleaner arm through other elements).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis discloses the agricultural row cleaner assembly wherein the row cleaner gauge wheel axle comprises a load pin (the term “load pin” is not a term of the art and therefore is interpreted reasonably broad; the axle is considered to be a load pin as it carries the gauge wheel which is considered to be a load).
Claim(s) 2, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sivinski and Brummelhuis as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Steinlage et al. (US 7568439).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis fails to specifically disclose the agricultural row cleaner wherein the mounting assembly comprises a top plate and a front plate extending downwardly from the top plate.
However, Steinlage discloses a similar implement that connects to an agricultural toolbar (Fig 1) and teaches the use of a mounting assembly to make the connection to the agricultural toolbar that has a top plate and front plate that extends downwardly from the top plate (see Annotated Figure 1).
Sivinski, Brummelhuis, and Steinlage are all considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of agricultural implements and attaching the implement to a toolbar. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis to incorporate the teachings of Steinlage and modified the mounting assembly to include a top plate and front plate as taught by Steinlage. One would have made this combination to have a more robust and secure connection between the implement and toolbar.
PNG
media_image1.png
353
617
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Sivinski, Brummelhuis, and Steinlage disclose the agricultural row cleaner assembly wherein the top plate and the front plate are a unitary part (see Annotated Figure 1).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sivinski and Brummelhuis as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jensen et al. (US 6701857).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis fails to specifically disclose the agricultural row cleaner further comprising a load sensor disposed on the first gauge wheel arm or the second gauge wheel arm.
However, Jensen discloses a similar implement with a gauge wheel arm and gauge wheel (Fig 6; arm 16 and 27, gauge wheel 25) and teaches the use of a load sensor disposed on the arm (sensor 40 disposed on 27; col 9, lines 31-33).
Sivinski, Brummelhuis, and Jensen are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of connecting agricultural implements to a toolbar. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the combination of Sivinski and Brummelhuis to incorporate the teachings of Jensen and combined the use of a sensor disposed on either gauge wheel arm. One would have made this combination to analyze the sensor output in order to maintain the proper cutting depth (Jensen; abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Martin et al. (US 20190230842) is still a pertinent piece of prior art as it disclose a similar linkage arrangement and trash clearer as claimed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE SCOVILLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30-6 (ET).
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.
/BLAKE E SCOVILLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671