DETAILED ACTION
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
This Non-Final action is in reply to the application 18009166 filed on 12/08/2022.
Claims 1 - 10 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/08/2022 was fully considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
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 1 – 10 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. Claims 1, 3, 5, and 7 are rejected for being indefinite for the claim limitations stating “preferably” as it is unclear whether that phrasing is required. The examiner requests the applicant apply the appropriate revision.
Dependent claims dependent on the independent claims are also further rejected herewithin.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 10238021 – Kirchhoff et al. hereinafter as KIRCHHOFF in view of US Patent 4632417 – Hodapp et al. hereinafter as HODAPP
Regarding Claim 1:
KIRCHHOFF discloses:
(Currently Amended) A soil-working device for row crops, comprising:
a frame which extends transversely with respect to the direction of travel in a working position ; ( col 2 line 19 – 25 – wherein there is a transverse beam, and at least one tool for working a row. Interpreted such that it would be traveling the row. ( col 1 line 49- 52 – working position)
a plurality of tool carriers which are arranged on the frame via in each case a remotely adjustable height-guiding device( Col 2 line 1 – 18 – finger weeder tools that are mounted to a transverse beam) , wherein soil-working tools assigned to individual plant rows are arranged on the tool carriers ,( Col 2 line 1 – 18 – where in the finger weeder tools are for working a row of the row of crops) and at least the height guidance devices of tool carriers ( Col 2 line 1 – 18 – where in the finger weeder tools are for working a row of the row of crops) arranged on base segment are coupled to another by mean of a preferably hydraulic, coupling control device, ( Col 2 line 43 – 46 – hydraulic cylinder, col 2 line 47 – 54 -adjustable hydraulically)
the height-guiding devices of tool carriers arranged on the base segment move the tool carriers into a position in which they are lowered relative to the frame ( Col 1 line 40 – 67 - wherein height guidance unit is height adjustable to be lowered from the transverse frame)
KIRCHHOFF discloses of a transverse frame that discloses the height guidance unit which is height adjustable in the working position, HODAPP discloses:
a frame which extends transversely with respect to the direction of travel in a working position and which has a base segment and at least one boom which is able to be folded with respect to the base segment( col 2 line 45 – 60 Fig. 1-5)
a folding device for moving the at least one foldable boom between the working position and a transport position in which it is folded by at least approximately 90 degrees, (col 3 line 54 -67, col 6 line 15 – 30, fig. 3 )
characterized in that the folding device for each movement of a boom from the working position into the transport position (col 7 line 55 – 67 – hydraulic cylinder and fig. 1 transport position)
It would obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the soil working device frame of height-guiding devices of tool carriers of KIRCHHOFF to include HODAPP’s ability to go from working position to transportation position. This would allow KIRCHHOFF to have the ability to reduce the turning radius of a tractor having a mounted toolbar and a trailing drawn toolbar of the same width without altering the tongue length of the trailing toolbar (HODAPP - col 2 line 24 – 28).
Regarding Claim 2:
HODAPP discloses the combination of a folding toolbar above in claim 1
2. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, wherein the height-guiding devices of tool carriers arranged on a boom are coupled to the coupling control device in such a way that each time a boom is moved from the working position to the transport position, the height-guiding devices of tool carriers arranged on a boom move the tool carriers into a raised position. (HODAPP col 6 line 57 – col 7 line 19 - in order to provide support for the outer wing toolbar 16 when in the upraised, retracted position)
Regarding Claim 3:
HODAPP discloses the combination of a folding toolbar above in claim 1
3. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, further comprising at least one support wheel , which is arranged on the frame , in particular a boom , via a remotely adjustable swivel device , preferably on the side facing away from the tool carriers (Col 4 line 30 - 44 – trailing frame with wheels)
Regarding Claim 4:
HODAPP discloses the combination of a folding toolbar above in claim 1
4. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 3 wherein the at least one swivel device is coupled to the coupling control device in such a way that whenever a boom is moved from the working position to the transport position, the swivel device swivels the at least one support wheel into a lift-out position. ( col 8 line 25 – 40 – raising for transport coupled through hydraulics)
Regarding Claim 5:
KIRCHHOFF / HODAPP disclose claim 1:
KIRCHHOFF discloses:
5. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, wherein the height-guiding devices are each configured to move the tool carrier into positions spaced at least 30 centimeters apart, preferably at least 40 centimeters apart. (fig. 10 – col 5 line 3 – 20 - telescoping distance for height shift )
Regarding Claim 6:
KIRCHHOFF / HODAPP disclose claim 1:
KIRCHHOFF discloses:
6. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, wherein the height-guiding devices comprise a releasable fixing device, which is preferably configured as a clamping device, for arranging the tool carriers on the frame , so that the tool carriers can be arranged on the frame at adjustable distances transversely to the direction of travel ( fig. 1 and col 4 line 13 – 30 – wherein holders have a fixation means meaning that holders can be removed and too allow tools to affix to beams)
Regarding Claim 7:
HODAPP discloses the combination in claim 1
7. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, wherein at least the height-guiding devices on a tool carrier arranged on a boom are lockable, preferably in the folded transport position of the soil-working device ( lock pin col 6 line 57 – 67 lock pin for transport)
Regarding Claim 8:
HODAPP discloses the combination in claim 1
8. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, wherein the coupling control device is configured as a hydraulic master circuit, so that whenever a boom is moved from the working position to the transport position, the height-guiding devices on the tool carrier arranged on the base segment can be controlled exclusively in the direction of the lowered position, the height-guiding devices on tool carriers arranged on a boom can be controlled exclusively in the direction of the raised position and/or the swivel devices can be controlled exclusively in the direction of the lift-out position. ( Col 8 line 5 – 60, hydraulic cylinder from working to transportation mode. And col 6 – 57 – col 7 line 20 – retracted position for tools)
Regarding Claim 9:
HODAPP discloses the combination in claim 1
9. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, wherein the frame comprises the base segment and two booms , in that the booms are arranged so as to be foldable about a respective horizontal axis , in front of the base segment in the direction of travel ( col 2 50 -62 – bifold hinge two booms, left and right wing to be folded horizontal axis)
Regarding Claim 10:
HODAPP discloses the combination in claim 1
10. (Currently Amended) the soil working device of claim 1, wherein the base segment and the booms are superimposed adjacent to the horizontal axis , in particular transversely to the direction of travel( col 5 27 – 50 – center alignment horizontal pivot)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent 6293475 – Subolk – Foldable boom for an agricultural sprayer
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFRED H TSUI whose telephone number is (571)272-9511. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Chris Sebesta can be reached on 5712720547. 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.
/A.H.T/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671