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 Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 13 reads “having a spring element in said connection such that each shearing element,” and should read -- having a spring element in said connection, --
Claim 2, line 1 reads “(WITHDRAWN)” and should read –(Cancelled)—
Claim 3, line 4 reads “guide plate.” And should read –guide plates, --
Claim 4, line 3 reads “their each” and should read –each--
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell (US 1105483 A) in view of Fralish (US 4418519 A).
Regarding CLAIM 1, Campbell discloses a mechanical shearing and harvesting tool (mower 10) comprising two individual cutting elements (chains 12),
each individual cuffing element of said two individual cuffing elements comprising a circular belt element holding a plurality of shearing elements (blades 14),
each said individual cutting element of said two individual cutting elements is parallel to each other along a horizontal plane (see fig. 4) and is each able to counter-rotate relative to the other (final page, lines 12-18),
each shearing element (14) of said plurality of shearing elements is individually removably connectable to each said circular belt element (via lugs 13).
Campbell does not disclose each shearing element of said plurality of shearing elements, when connected to said circular belt element, having a spring element in said connection, each shearing element of said plurality of shearing elements individually and separately pivots against an opposing force greater than the tension of said spring element, each shearing element of said plurality of shearing elements that is in pivot against an opposing force greater than the tension of said spring element is returnable back to its unobstructed position upon removal of said opposing force.
In the same field of endeavor, Fralish discloses cutting elements (20) connected to a circular belt element (48, 50), each cutting element having a spring element (62) in said connection, each cutting element of individually and separately pivots against an opposing force greater than the tension of said spring element, each cutting element that is in pivot against an opposing force greater than the tension of said spring element is returnable back to its unobstructed position upon removal of said opposing force (col. 3 lines 4-13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the cutting elements of Campbell with spring elements in connection with the circular belt, as disclosed by Fralish, so that the cutting elements may withstand striking obstacles while cutting and be returned to their original positions.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell (US 1105483 A) in view of Fralish (US 4418519 A), and further in view of Loftus (US 5732539 A).
Regarding CLAIM 3, the resultant combination of Campbell and Fralish discloses: Said mechanical shearing and harvesting tool according to Claim 1.
The combination does not disclose wherein each said circular belt element of each said cutting element is held within a platform, said platform comprising a guide element, said guide element of said platform comprising two guide plates, each guide plate of said two guide plates is positioned above and below each said cutting element, a narrow space exists between said two guide plates to allow space for the vertical pivoting action of a shearing element against an opposing force, said guide element limits the distance of pivot of each shearing element against an opposing force.
In the same field of endeavor, Loftus discloses a harvesting tool having a circular belt element (chain 12) and attached cutting elements (knives 10), wherein each said circular belt element of each said cutting element is held within a platform (7), said platform comprising a guide element (70, 78), said guide element of said platform comprising two guide plates (70, 78), each guide plate of said two guide plates is positioned above and below each said cutting element, a narrow space exists between said two guide plates to allow space for the vertical pivoting action of a shearing element against an opposing force (see fig. 3), said guide element limits the distance of pivot of each shearing element against an opposing force (col. 7 lines 11-24).
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 resultant combination with two guide plates above and below the cutting elements, as disclosed by Loftus, to keep the circular belt in its proper alignment.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell (US 1105483 A) in view of Fralish (US 4418519 A), and further in view of Rilling (DE 2806583 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, the resultant combination of Campbell and Fralish discloses: Said mechanical shearing and harvesting tool according to Claim 1
The combination does not disclose wherein each said shearing element (14) of each said cutting element having a gap space between each adjacent shearing element.
In the same field of endeavor, Rilling discloses shearing elements (31) attached to a circular belt element (32) and spaced apart from one another by a distance to allow a gap therebetween (fig. 4). Rilling further discloses individual cutting elements positioned above and below each other along a horizontal plane and able to move in counter-rotation of each other (paragraphs 0005, 0014-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the circular belt element of the resultant combination with gaps between attached shearing elements, as disclosed by Rilling, to yield a predictable resulting harvesting tool requiring fewer total shearing elements.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE RUNCO whose telephone number is (469)295-9123. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 M-F.
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, Joseph Rocca can be reached at 5712728971. 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.
/M.I.R./ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/JOSEPH M ROCCA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671