DETAILED ACTION
This is a final reissue action addressing the response dated 26 June 2026. This reissue addresses U.S. Patent 11,006,578 B2 (hereafter “the ‘578 patent” and equivalent). The following is the status of the claims as presented:
Claims 1-24 are pending. Of those,
Claims 1, 2 and 5-8 are labeled three times amended
Claims 3 and 4 are labeled as patented
Claims 9, 10, 20, 22 and 23 are labeled new and thrice amended
Claims 11, 12, 14-19, 21 and 24 are new
Claim 13 is labeled as twice amended
No claims are cancelled or withdrawn.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Disposition of the Claims
Claims 2, 5 and 8 have the status of “three times amended”, however, no amendments appear to be shown in the claims. Upon review the claims appear to be as patented.
Maintenance Fees
Review of the record indicates the maintenance fees are current. The next maintenance fee has a window that opens 18 May 2028.
Amendments
The amendment to the claims filed on 26 June 2026, is objected to as not complying with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.173(b)(2) and (d)(1)&(2) because each change relative to the ‘578 patent has not been properly marked. 37 CFR 1.173(b)(2) and (d)(1)&(2) state:
(b) Making amendments in a reissue application. An amendment in a reissue application is made either by physically incorporating the changes into the specification when the application is filed, or by a separate amendment paper. If amendment is made by incorporation, markings pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section must be used. If amendment is made by an amendment paper, the paper must direct that specified changes be made, as follows:
(2) Claims. An amendment paper must include the entire text of each claim being changed by such amendment paper and of each claim being added by such amendment paper. For any claim changed by the amendment paper, a parenthetical expression “amended,” “twice amended,” etc., should follow the claim number. Each changed patent claim and each added claim must include markings pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section, except that a patent claim or added claim should be canceled by a statement canceling the claim without presentation of the text of the claim.
(d) Changes shown by markings. Any changes relative to the patent being reissued which are made to the specification, including the claims, upon filing, or by an amendment paper in the reissue application, must include the following markings:
(1) The matter to be omitted by reissue must be enclosed in brackets; and
(2) The matter to be added by reissue must be underlined, except for amendments submitted on compact discs (§§ 1.96 and 1.821(c)). Matter added by reissue on compact discs must be preceded with “<U>” and end with “</U>” to properly identify the material being added.
The claims presented in the amendment filed 26 June 2026, do not include proper markings with respect to the original claims of the ‘578 patent. For example, Claim 1, lines 6 and 7, as amended, states, “…a continuous conveyor loop conveyor loop [of] draper material is mounted…”
These corrections should be submitted with the next correspondence.
Response to Arguments
The following addresses applicant’s remarks/arguments dated 26 June 2026. Applicant’s courtesies were appreciated.
Claim rejections – 35 USC 112 and 251
Applicant’s amendments to have the claims state “draper canvas” is noted. While this appears to be the instance with respect to Claim 9, Claim 1 still states “draper material”. As a result, the rejection to Claim 9 is withdrawn and only a rejection to Claim 1 remains (see below).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “of” (line 6) is lined through, which indicates deletion. For fluidity, the examiner suggests this word not be deleted. Upon review, this appears to be an inadvertent matter stemming from a prior amendment. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
35 USC 112(a) – new mater and written description:
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contain(s) subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent Claim 1: the language at issue is “draper material” (e.g., independent claim 1, line 7 and elsewhere and in its respective dependent claims). This language broadens the language of the originally filed claims in the underlying patent (see Application Number 16/883971: Claim 1, line 4 and claim 9 line 4). The originally filed claims and originally filed disclosure only reference “draper canvas” and not “draper material”. During prosecution of the ‘971 application, applicant amended “draper material” into the claims (see claims submitted 11 January 2021: Claim 9, lines 6 and 7); this is the first time “draper material” appeared in the application.
Upon review of the disclosure, no language is provided to conclude that the material can be any material other than “draper canvas”, and the examiner references Col. 3, lines 40-67 for support. In no part of the written description does applicant provide support for “material”, nor is sufficient disclosure provided to conclude that applicant had possession of the broad limitation “material”. Further, the language “continuous conveyor loop of draper material” references the draper canvas (‘578 patent: Col. 3, lines 45-50), which is reproduced below, with emphasis added:
The rollers provide support for a draper canvas 20, which is a continuous loop of material commonly formed by taking a fabric and coating it with rubber, which is then vulcanized and formed as desired for the particular application.
As provided, one having ordinary skill would clearly interpret that “material” and “fabric” are directed to the “canvas”: it does not distinguish from “canvas” nor is language provided to clearly denote that the features are different from “canvas”. Therefore, the examiner concludes the broadening of the language from “draper canvas” to “draper material” and the language “continuous conveyor loop of material” is considered new matter.
Those claims listed under this heading but not directly addressed are rejected as either including language addressed in claim 1, or as being dependent from rejected claims, either directly or indirectly.
Claim rejection – 35 USC 112(b):
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said draper canvas" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC 251
The following is a quotation of 35 USC §251:
(a) IN GENERAL.—Whenever any patent is, through error, deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had a right to claim in the patent, the Director shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the fee required by law, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent, and in accordance with a new and amended application, for the unexpired part of the term of the original patent. No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.
****
(c) APPLICABILITY OF THIS TITLE.— The provisions of this title relating to applications for patent shall be applicable to applications for reissue of a patent, except that application for reissue may be made and sworn to by the assignee of the entire interest if the application does not seek to enlarge the scope of the claims of the original patent or the application for the original patent was filed by the assignee of the entire interest.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 USC 251 for containing new matter. The position under this heading is the same as that provided under the 35 USC 112(a) heading with the respective claims, which will not be repeated here for brevity.
Allowable Subject Matter
The examiner reserves comment on the allowability of Claims 1-8 pending resolution of the rejection under 35USC 112(a), above. The examiner has no further art to cite against the claims at this time.
Claims 9-24 are allowed.
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 WILLIAM V GILBERT whose telephone number is (571)272-9055. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0800-0430 Eastern.
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, Eileen Lillis can be reached at 571.272.6928. 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.
/WILLIAM V GILBERT/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
CONFEREES:
/MATTHEW J KASZTEJNA/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
/EILEEN D LILLIS/SPRS, Art Unit 3993
Prosecution Insights