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 .
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-29 are pending.
Claim 1-11 of Group I were elected without traverse.
Claims 12-29 are withdrawn, being drawn to unelected Group II.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claims 2-11, the recitation “a robotic mower”, has prior antecedent basis from Claim 1, as Examiner suggests the recitation be changed to “the robotic mower” for greater clarity.
Regarding claim 9, the recitations of “an inner sider” and “an outer sider” are indefinite as it is unclear what is meant be “sider”; if they are the same as “side” of line 2 and since they have no prior antecedent basis. It is suggested by the Examiner that the limits be changed to “an inner side” and “an outer side” for greater clarity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20180184585-A1 to Song (“Song”), and further in view of US-9393833-B2 to Vickers (“Vickers”).
Regarding Claim 1, Song discloses a robotic mower (Para 43, line 2, Fig 4) comprising: a housing (20 “inner body”); a walking assembly configured for driving the robotic mower (including: 51 wheel driving unit “mounted to” two 50 wheels and including 54 “housing supporter”, 52 “housing”, para 146, Figs 15, 16) , the walking assembly further including at least one walking wheel (two 50, Fig 15); at least one universal wheel (40 “caster”, Para 52, Fig 2)) disposed on the housing by a wheel shaft ; the walking wheel including a wheel hub (hub would implicitly part of 50 a rotatable wheel, that would have a flat surface [inner side] to mount to flat mount plate of 54 having outward facing holes, Fig 15).
Song does not specifically disclose a wheel cover (but one is implied since wheel 50 does not show outward facing side [outer side] of hub, the outward face of wheel and wheel hub is obscured by a type of cover) nor a wheel cover trim; wherein the wheel cover trim detachably mounted on the wheel cover.
Vickers discloses a wheel cover assembly (“trim component” including: 11 “decorative trim component” [exposed to outward side of wheel , with a ring shape coaxial with hub and cover]; [Col 4 lines 16-17, Fig 6a], 12 “center cap” (12 is disposed on 14 center aperture of wheel hub Col 4, lines 35-45)[i.e. disposed on the wheel hub]; 13 “locking member/cap badge” [being a decorative block with radially outward flange, Fig 2], and { mounting holes Col 4-5], Col1 lines 41-43, Col 3 lines 31-34, Figs 1-8, ) and a wheel cover trim (11); wherein the wheel cover trim detachably mounted (Col 7 lines 41-43, ) on the wheel cover.
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the robotic mower and the wheel cover and wheel cover trim in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the robotic mower of Song and the teaching of the wheel cover and wheel cover trim of Vickers to modify the walking wheel (50) of Song such that is has a wheel cover and wheel trim (like Vickers) with the motivation to improve the aesthetic characteriscs of the wheel (Col 1 lines 11-16, Col 3 lines 25-37), having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses the wheel cover is disposed on the wheel hub (as described in paragraph 9 of this document).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses wheel cover trim (11) is located between the wheel hub (having aperture 14, Fig 1) and the wheel cover (axially outer parts of wheel cover 36, 12), as shown Vickers Fig 1, )
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses one wheel cover mounting holes (26 in 12 Col 5 line 6; circular recess in 11, 39 in 13, Col 4 lines 16-17, Col 5 line 6, Figs 2-4, and described in paragraph 9 of this document) are arranged on the wheel cover.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses a middle portion (central inner body of 11) and more than one protrusions (five 15 “arms”, Col 4 line 20) extending outward (Fig 6a) in in the circumferential direction from the middle portion, the protrusions are embedded in corresponding wheel cover mounting holes (11) (as described in paragraph 9 of this document)
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses a ring-shaped body and coaxial with the wheel hub and the wheel cover (as described in paragraph 9 of this document).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses the protrusions (21 on 12) include a decorative block (12) adapted to the wheel cover mounting hole, and a flange located on one side of the decorative block and protruding from the decorative block, when the protrusion is embedded in the corresponding wheel cover mounting hole, the decorative block is fitted into (via 13) the corresponding wheel cover mounting hole and exposed from the outer side of the wheel cover (as described in paragraph 9 of this document).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses a fitting head (12) for engaging with the wheel hub (as described in paragraph 9 of this document).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses an inner side (right outward Song Fig 15) and an outer side(right outward Song Fig 15), the inner side of the wheel hub is flat (as described in paragraph 9 of this document).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses positioned and installed by at least two asymmetrically arranged (underlined limits are method limits in a product claim( “product by process”) not limiting “The patentabiliy of a product does not depend on its method of production [or installation]. (MPEP 2113). Because the patentability of the cover does not depend on the method of installing or arranging) positioning members (20 on 12, are capable of acting like positioning members, [i.e. positioning rods] to fit 12 in 14 central aperture [i.e. wheel hub positioning hole] of hub, Fig 1, 2, Col 4, lines 35-45).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Song and Vickers discloses the positioning members includes a positioning rod and a wheel hub positioning hole (as described in paragraph 8, 11 of this document).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Cuevas (US-7416260-B1), Rose (US-20150210110-A1), and Eikhoff (US-6402254-B1) disclose wheel covers; Dunn (US-5113642-A), Messina (US-8234848-B2), Song (US-10555457-B2), Hong (US-20190307062-A1, EP-3560312-A2), Ito (US-20180199506-A1) disclose robotic mowers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVA LYNN COMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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 Morano can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights