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 Final action is in reply to the application 18100029 amendment filed on 12/23/2025.
Claims 21-22 are rejected.
Claims 2 -3 and 7 are cancelled.
Claims 21 – 23 are new
Claim 23 is objected to.
Claim 1, 4 – 6, 8 – 15,16 – 20 are allowable
Claims 1, 4 – 6, 8 - 23 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
The examiner states that the applicants arguments regarding claim 1 and 16 are persuasive and are in condition for allowance. Dependent claims for 4 – 5, 8 – 15, 17 – 20 are also is condition for allowance.
The examiner states that the applicants newly added claim 21, 22 and 23. The claims 21 and 22 are further rejected under ADEE / GRIESHOP for claim 21 and ADEE / GRIESHOP / DOEPKER for claim 22. Claim 23 is objected to for the reasons detailed in the allowable subject matter below. Based on the newly added claims, the applicants reasons for arguments regarding claim 21 are not persuasive because the claims cited recites the configuration needed for the claim. Please see the updated rejection below.
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) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 4066274 – Adee et al. hereinafter as ADEE in view of CA3061112 – Grieshop et al. hereinafter as GRIESHOP
Regarding Claim 21
ADEE discloses:
21. (New) An agricultural assembly, comprising:
a frame; (fig. 2 – frame 10)
a hitch assembly coupled to the frame and configured to selectively couple the frame to a work machine; (fig. 2 – hitch 12)
a first tool bar assembly comprising:
a first center section with a first forward side wing pivotally coupled to the first center section on one side and a second forward side wing pivotally coupled to the first center section on the other side; (fig. 1 rear beam 56 is the first tool bar assembly . Preferably, each link 76 is so disposed and is of such a length that it maintains its two front and rear beams 18 and 56 in a laterally outwardly diverging relationship to one another when in the working position of FIG. 1. Moreover, such disposition of the links 76 is so selected that the beams 18 and 56 will fold back into substantial parallel alignment with one another and with the tongue 10 when in the transport position.)
wherein the first and second forward wing extensions are movable relative to the first and second forward side wings to be positioned at least partially above the respective first and second forward side wing in the transport configuration. ( fig. 1 and fig. 2 coupled to frame , hydraulic system for folding and engaging col 3 line 37 – 53)
ADEE discloses an implement with a first forward side wing and a second forward side wing, GRIESHOP discloses:
a first forward wing extension movably coupled to the first forward side wing and a second forward wing extension movably coupled to the second forward side wing; (para. 0030 – four bar vertical mechanism)
a first forward four bar linkage assembly coupling the first forward wing extension to the first forward side wing and a second forward four bar linkage assembly coupling the second forward wing extension to the second forward side wing;( para. 0030 main wings include respective raised section vertical component of travel to clear the wheels. The vertical movement of the frame structure by a four bar linkage 110)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicants invention for ADEE discloses a first forward side wing and a second forward side wing to utilize GRIESHOP disclosing of wing extensions to the existing wings and wherein the first and second forward wing extensions are movable relative to the first and second forward side wings to be positioned at least partially above the respective first and second forward side wing in the transport configuration. This would allow ADEE to reduce the width of apparatus when in storage and transport position.( para. 0003)
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 4066274 – Adee et al. hereinafter as ADEE in view of CA3061112 – Grieshop et al. hereinafter as GRIESHOP and further in view of US Patent 3360053 – Doepker et al. hereinafter as DOEPKER
Regarding Claim 22
ADEE / GRIESHOP disclose claim 21
ADEE / GRIESHOP discloses:
a second tool bar assembly comprising:
a second center section and first rearward side wing and a second rearward side wing pivotally coupled to the second center section on opposing sides; (fig. 1front beam 18 is the first tool bar assembly . Preferably, each link 76 is so disposed and is of such a length that it maintains its two front and rear beams 18 and 56 in a laterally outwardly diverging relationship to one another when in the working position of FIG. 1. Moreover, such disposition of the links 76 is so selected that the beams 18 and 56 will fold back into substantial parallel alignment with one another and with the tongue 10 when in the transport position.)
ADEE discloses the implement with a first tool bar assembly and second tool bar assembly, GRIESHOP discloses:
a first rearward wing extension movably coupled to the first rearward side wing and a second rearward wing extension movably coupled to the second rearward side wing, wherein the first and second rearward wing extensions are movable relative to the first and second rearward side wings to be positioned at least partially above the corresponding first and second rearward side wing in the transport configuration; ( para. 0030 main wings include respective raised section vertical component of travel to clear the wheels. The vertical movement of the frame structure by a four bar linkage 110)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicants invention for ADEE discloses a first rearward side wing and a second rearward side wing to utilize GRIESHOP disclosing of wing extensions to the existing wings and wherein the first and second rearward wing extensions are movable relative to the first and second rearward side wings to be positioned at least partially above the respective first and second rearward side wing in the transport configuration. This would allow ADEE to reduce the width of apparatus when in storage and transport position.( para. 0003)
ADEE discloses the two toolbars mechanisms that are folded rearwardly away from hitch, DOEPKER discloses:
wherein both the first tool bar assembly and the second tool bar assembly fold towards the hitch assembly as the first tool bar and second tool bar transition from a planting configuration to a transport configuration.( col 1 line 30 – 34 - When the horizontal pivot lies outwardly of an associated vertical pivoting joint in the end of the center frame, the wing section may be rotated either forward or backward to reduce the width of the implement, as when roading it.)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicants invention to combine ADEE / GRIESHOP’s implement of two toolbars rearwardly folding away from the hitch with DOEPKER device of a toolbar mechanism that be folded forwardly towards the hitch as this would allow ADEE the ability to reduce the width of the implement( DOEPKER - col 1 line 30 – 34)slide
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3 – 6, 8 – 15, 16 - 20 are allowed
Claims 23 is objected
Claims 23 is objected to as depending from a rejected claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form incorporating all limitations of intervening claims.
For independent claim 1 the examiner states that the applicant has rolled up dependent claim 7 marked as allowable. For independent claim 16, prior art ADEE / DOEPKER / GRIESHOP such references do not disclose the specific details of “ wherein, in the planting configuration, the first toolbar assembly positions at least one row unit a first row unit offset from a wheel axis and the second toolbar assembly positions at least one row unit a second row unit offset form the wheel axis, wherein the first and second rtow unit offsets are about the same and configured to provide consistent row spacing of the agricultural assembly in turning conditions” . Such modification would require too significant and would constitute an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
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 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
Prosecution Insights