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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 12-17 in the reply filed on 10/14/25 is acknowledged.
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(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baugher et al. (5,802,995) in view of Schafer et al. (2015/0230392) and Mori et al. (2010/0292045).
Regarding claim 12, Baugher et al. disclose a gauge arm comprising:
An arm portion (286)
An unthreaded receptacle portion (298)
A single interior stop (300) within a bore of said receptacle portion, wherein said unthreaded receptacle is adapted for receiving two sealed (306,308) bearings (302), one on each side of said single interior stop
A first bearing (302) is inserted into said receptacle on a first side of said single interior stop (Figure 18)
A second sealed bearing (302) is inserted into said receptacle portion against a second side of said single interior stop (Figure 18), wherein said gauge arm is suitable for use in a planter
While Baugher discloses the invention as described above, it fails to disclose that the bearings are press fit into place. Like Baugher, Schafer also teaches a sealed bearing on a gauge arm for a planter. Unlike Baugher, Schafer specifically discloses that the sealed bearings are press fit into place (pgph 0021). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a press fit for the bearings in Baugher as taught by Schafer as it would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)).
While the combination of Baugher and Schafer discloses the invention as described above, it fails to disclose that the two bearings can be different sizes with one of the bearings being a double row bearing. Like the combination, Mori discloses a axial support system (23) using multiple bearings. Unlike the combination, Mori discloses that single bearings can be used together, double bearings can be used together or one of each can be used for varying benefits in different arrangements (pgph 0048). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a single bearing and a double bearing in the combination as taught by Mori as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)). Further, it appears to be an obvious matter of design choice to utilize different size bearings, as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. Applicant discloses in the originally filed specification that the two bearings are preferably different sizes but that they need not be different and could include two identical bearings thereby showing a lack of criticality (pgph 0013). It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by the combination.
Regarding claim 13, the combination discloses that the receptacle portion is a smooth bore.
Regarding claim 14, the combination discloses that the two bearings can be of different dimensions (Mori).
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baugher et al. (5,802,995) in view of Schafer et al. (2015/0230392) and Mori et al. (2010/0292045) as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Kester (2017/0156254).
Regarding claims 15-16, the combination discloses the invention as described above, but fails to specifically disclose that the bearing assembly is used for a gauge wheel and closing wheel bearing and/or a round bore grain drill. Like the combination, Kester also discloses a bearing assembly for mounting agricultural implements to mounting arms. Unlike the combination, Kester discloses that the same bearing arrangements can be utilized in multiple different embodiments to mount different tools to their respective arms (mounting structure 100 for closing wheel bearing structure and/or mounting structure 10 for a gauge wheel/opening drill) (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the bearing arrangement of the combination on multiple different rolling tools including but no limited to a gauge wheel, closing wheel, drill, etc. as it would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baugher et al. (5,802,995) in view of Schafer et al. (2015/0230392) and Mori et al. (2010/0292045) as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Copp et al. (2014/0312646).
Regarding claim 17, the combination discloses the invention as described above but fails to disclose that the bearing can be held in place with a press fit and no additional fasteners. Like the combination, Copp also discloses a bearing press fit into place. Unlike the combination, Copp discloses that bearings can be press fit into position using tolerances such that no other fasteners are required (pgph 0174). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize tolerances on the press fit that do not require further fasteners int eh combination as taught by Copp as the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Garner (EP4289245) also discloses a press fit for a bearing that requires no additional fasteners (Figure 3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jamie L McGowan whose telephone number is (571)272-5064. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00-5:00 CST.
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 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.
/JAMIE L MCGOWAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671