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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Docken et al. (WO2021091972).
With respect to claim 1, Docken et al. disclose a robotic garden tool, comprising: a deck (102); an implement (310, 314) movably coupled to the deck; a motor (370) configured to drive the implement; and a height adjustment mechanism (320, 340, 324, 342, 356, 346, 352) configured to control the movement of the implement with respect to the deck and along an axis (see paragraph 61), the height adjustment mechanism including an interface of meshing gear teeth (352 and 346) including a drive gear (352 driven by 356) and a driven spiral rack (rack 324 and 342), the spiral rack being arranged along a helical path about the axis (see paragraph 59, helical threads).
With respect to claim 2, Docken disclose wherein the interface of meshing gear teeth includes a first set of gear teeth (346) and a second set of gear teeth (352), wherein the first set of gear teeth is configured to mesh with the second set of gear teeth (see paragraph 7).
With respect to claim 3, Docken disclose wherein the first set of gear teeth is
configured to be manually actuated to effectuate movement of the second set of gear teeth (see paragraph 61).
With respect to claim 4, Docken disclose wherein the second set of gear teeth is
configured to be driven by a servomotor (356, which is considered to be a servomotor – see paragraph 62 as it is used in conjunction with a controller and data to form a closed-looped system and hence a servomotor).
With respect to claim 5, Docken disclose wherein the height adjustment mechanism further includes a manual actuator configured to move in response to manual actuation by an operator, wherein the implement is configured to move with respect to the deck in response to the manual actuation of the manual actuator (see paragraph 61, wherein the pinion gear can be manually operated, which results in rotation of 340 which results in axial translation of 320).
With respect to claim 15, Docken disclose a cutting module for a robotic garden tool, comprising: a motor (370) configured to drive an implement (310, 314); and a height adjustment mechanism (320, 340, 324, 342, 356, 346, 352) configured to move the implement along an axis and independently from the driving of the implement (see paragraph 61), the height adjustment mechanism including an interface of meshing gear teeth (352 and 346) including a drive gear (352 driven by 356) and a driven spiral rack (rack 324 and 342), the spiral rack being arranged along a helical path about the axis (see paragraph 59, helical threads).
With respect to claim 16, Docken disclose wherein the interface of meshing gear teeth includes a first set of gear teeth (346) and a second set of gear teeth (352), wherein the first set of gear teeth is configured to mesh with the second set of gear teeth (see paragraph 7).
With respect to claim 17, Docken disclose wherein the first set of gear teeth is
configured to be manually actuated to effectuate movement of the second set of gear teeth (see paragraph 61).
With respect to claim 18, Docken disclose wherein the second set of gear teeth is
configured to be driven by a servomotor (356, which is considered to be a servomotor – see paragraph 62 as it is used in conjunction with a controller and data to form a closed-looped system and hence a servomotor).
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) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Docken in view of Guilmette (USP 5421092).
With respect to claim 14, Docken is silent as to the inches of movement per degree of rotation.
However, Guilmette discloses rotation of at least a portion of the interface about a central axis causes the implement to move at least 0.75 inches per 90 degrees of rotation (in lines 37-48 of column 5, Guilmette discloses a three lead worm gear – a three lead gear will advance linearly by three inches over one revolution, or 0.75 inches over a 90 degree rotation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to have modified the rotation of Docken to rotate as taught by Gilmette for the predictable result of a height adjustment system that would raise or lower the lawnmower blades by three inches for each full turn of the worm screw (see MPEP 2143(I)(B)). This modification is also obvious as a matter of routine optimization; because the height adjustment mechanism of Docken can be adjusted by hand, there is a design need to make the device ergonomically attractive; there are a limited number of leads for worm screws that are manufactured as suggested by Guilmette’s discussion of the difficulty in finding a manufacturer of the three lead worm screw that is disclosed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With respect to claim 6, the prior art does not disclose, not would it be obvious to modify to include “wherein the gear is a bevel gear including bevel gear teeth enmeshed with rack teeth of the spiral rack” in combination with the other limitations of claim 6.
Claim 20 is allowed.
With respect to claim 20, the prior art does not disclose nor would it be obvious to modify the art to include “the interface including a drive gear and a driven spiral rack, the spiral rack being arranged along a helical path about the axis” in combination with the other limitations of claim 20.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 3/10/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Docken. In view of this new rejection, this action is hereby made nonfinal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE A COY whose telephone number is (571)272-5405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6am-3:30pm.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/Nicole Coy/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights