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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Demorest (US 4505094 A).
Regarding claim 1, Demorest teaches a stalk-diameter sensing system [13] for use with an agricultural harvester [11] that travels on a field in a forward direction (see Fig. 1), the stalk- diameter sensing system comprising:
a first stalk feeler [47] and a second stalk feeler [48], the first and second stalk feelers deflectably mounted on opposite sides of a stalk-receiving gap [27] that receives a stalk [18] planted in the field, the first and second stalk feelers yieldably biased to a neutral position (crop engaging position as seen in Fig. 1, see Col. 6, lines 25-27) into the stalk-receiving gap for deflection (see Col. 5, lines 17-22) upon contact with an outer surface of the stalk (outer surface of [18]) as the agricultural harvester travels on the field in the forward direction,
a first sensor [41] and a second sensor [43], the first sensor coupled to the first stalk feeler (see Fig. 1) to sense deflection of the first stalk feeler and generate a first signal (see Col. 4, lines 61-68 and Col. 5, lines 1-2), the second sensor coupled to the second stalk feeler (see Fig. 1) to sense deflection of the second stalk feeler and generate a second signal (see Col. 4, lines 61-68 and Col. 5, lines 1-2), and
a first damper [125] and a second damper**, the first damper positioned to dampen deflection (see Col. 6, lines 60-63) of the first stalk feeler, the second damper positioned to dampen deflection of the second stalk feeler, the first and second dampers configured to dampen deflection of the corresponding first and second stalk feeler away from the neutral position (the damper dampens deflection of the feeler when the feeler comes into contact with an obstacle, see Col. 7, lines 7-10) and not dampen a closing of the stalk-receiving gap by a biased return (closing of the feeler is through spring [101] and slot [123], allowing for a biased return to the neutral position; see Col. 6, lines 25-27 and 67-68 and Col. 7, lines 1-3) of the first and second stalk feelers to the neutral position.
**NOTE: the stalk diameter sensing system is identical in construction on the first and second side; therefore, the references for the construction of the first side are identical to the second (see Col. 5, lines 63-68), so only the first references will be mentioned.
Regarding claim 2, Demorest teaches wherein at least one of the first damper [125] and the second damper is a rotary damper (see Col. 6, lines 60-63).
Regarding claim 4, Demorest teaches comprising a first pivot joint (joint of [77 and 79]; see Col. 6, lines 8-10) defining a first pivot axis (see below) about which the first stalk feeler [47] pivots and a second pivot joint defining a second pivot axis about which the second stalk feeler pivots, wherein each of the first stalk feeler and the second stalk feeler comprises a pivot body [77], the first pivot axis extends through the pivot body (see below) of the first stalk feeler, the second pivot axis extends through the pivot body of the second stalk feeler, the first damper [125] is coupled to the pivot body (coupled through [127]) of the first stalk feeler, and the second damper is coupled to the pivot body of the second stalk feeler.
PNG
media_image1.png
315
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Demorest teaches wherein each of the pivot bodies [77] comprises an arm ([81]; see Col. 6, lines 10-12), the first damper [125] is coupled to the arm of the pivot body (coupled through [127]) of the first stalk feeler [47], and the second damper is coupled to the arm of the pivot body of the second stalk feeler.
Regarding claim 6, Demorest teaches wherein the first stalk feeler [47] comprises a bar ([47] is a bar, see Fig. 1) extending into the stalk-receiving gap [27] and coupled to the arm ([81]; see Col. 6, lines 10-12) of the pivot body [77] of the first stalk feeler (coupled through bolts [85-87]; see Col. 6, lines 10-12), and the second stalk feeler comprises a bar extending into the stalk- receiving gap and coupled to the arm of the pivot body of the second stalk feeler.
Regarding claim 8, Demorest teaches comprising a first spring [101] and a second spring, wherein each of the first stalk feeler [47] and the second stalk feeler [48] comprises a bar (both feelers are bars; see Fig. 1), the pivot body [77] of the first stalk feeler comprises a first arm ([81]; see Col. 6, lines 10-12) to which the bar of the first stalk feeler and the first damper [125] are coupled (coupled through [127]) and a second arm ([83]; see Col. 6, lines 10- 12) to which the first spring is coupled (coupled through connection to [79]), and the pivot body of the second stalk feeler comprises a first arm to which the bar of the second stalk feeler and the second damper are coupled and a second arm to which the second spring is coupled.
Regarding claim 10, Demorest teaches wherein the first stalk feeler [47] and the second stalk feeler [48] are mounted for pivotal movement (see Col. 6, lines 8-10) respectively about a first pivot axis (see above) and a second pivot axis, the first damper [125] is coupled to the first stalk feeler via a first damper attachment point (see below), and the second damper is coupled to the second stalk feeler via a second damper attachment point.
PNG
media_image2.png
313
673
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Demorest teaches comprising a first spring [101] and a second spring, wherein each of the first stalk feeler [47] and the second stalk feeler [48] comprises a bar (both feelers are bars; see Fig. 1), the first stalk feeler comprises a first arm ([81]; see Col. 6, lines 10-12) to which the bar of the first stalk feeler and the first damper [125] are coupled (coupled through [127]) and a second arm ([83]; see Col. 6, lines 10-12) to which the first spring is coupled (coupled through connection to [79]), and the second stalk feeler comprises a first arm to which the bar of the second stalk feeler and the second damper are coupled and a second arm to which the second spring is coupled.
Regarding claim 12, Demorest teaches wherein the first damper [125] and the second damper are each a unidirectional damper (damper deflection occurs in the direction of the feeler coming into contact with an obstacle, but does not damper the feeler back to neutral, see Col. 7, lines 7-10).
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) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Demorest (US 4505094 A) in view of Grywacheski et al. (US 7726111 B2).
Regarding claim 3, Demorest discloses the first and second damper [125], but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the damper is a linear damper.
Grywacheski et al. discloses a similar agricultural harvester [10] comprising of a linear damper [66].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the damper of Demorest with the linear damper of Grywacheski et al. since both are devices utilized to slow down motion; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 9 and 13-18 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Please see updated art rejections above in response to applicant’s claim amendments.
Applicant’s remarks in page 3 sets forth that Demorest’s damper [125] fails to meet the newly added limitations to claim 1 due to the “guide 125 provides a long lasting shock absorber for movement of arm 47, particularly when arm 47 is required to swing through its full range of travel following impact with an obstacle or even a crop stalk” (see Demorest Col. 7, lines 7-10).
However, while Demorest’s damper [125] is configured to dampen deflection of the stalk feeler [47] when the feeler comes into contact with an obstacle or a corn stalk, it does not damper the feeler back to the neutral position. This is accomplished through spring [101] and slot [123]. Spring [101] biases the feeler into the neutral position (see Demorest Col. 6, lines 25-27), and can be adjusted to increase the force needed to move the feeler (see Demorest Col. 6, lines 44-59). Likewise, slot [123] is sized to permit the feeler to return to the neutral position through the bias of the spring (see Demorest Col. 6, lines 67-68 and Col. 7, lines 1-3).
It can be seen then that while damper [125] provides shock absorbing “particularly when arm 47 is required to swing through its full range of travel following impact”, this full range of travel is limited to one direction. The spring [101] and the slot [123] bias the feeler back to the neutral position; therefore, the damper [125] does not dampen deflection of the feeler as it returns to the neutral position and meets the newly added limitations to claim 1.
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 SUNNY WEBB whose telephone number is (571)272-3830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 to 5:30 E.T..
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 571-272-8971. 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.
/SUNNY D WEBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/JOSEPH M ROCCA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671