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 § 112
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.
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6, lines 2-4 set forth “wherein the at least one intermediate paddle or at least one portion of the at least one intermediate paddle is mounted between the pair of blades of at least one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes”. However, it is unclear if the intermediate paddle is one of the plurality of paddles set forth in dependent claim 1, line 4. Further, it is unclear if there are two paddles extending between the blades of the V-shaped vanes, or one or the intermediate or plurality of paddles; therefore, the claim is rejected for being indefinite.
For the purpose of the examination, the examiner is interpreting this limitation to mean there are two groups of paddles – the plurality of paddles set forth in claim 1 and the intermediate paddle set forth in claim 6 – mounted at different locations between the plurality of V-shaped vanes.
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) 1-4, 10-11, and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bortner et al. (US 20230157211 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bortner et al. teaches a feed roll [16] configured to be rotatably mounted upstream of threshing rotors [22] of a combine harvester [10], the feed roll comprising:
a cylindrical outer surface [104];
a plurality of paddles ([124 and 164]; upright walls capable of deflecting stones or other objects, therefore, are both paddles) mounted upright on the cylindrical outer surface and oriented essentially parallel to a rotation axis [108] of the feed roll;
a plurality of V-shaped vanes [132] mounted upright on the cylindrical outer surface in a central area (see below) thereof, and configured to guide respective flows of crops towards the threshing rotors (see paragraph [0040], lines 1-9), each of the plurality of V-shaped vanes comprising a pair of blades [136 and 138] tapering outwardly in opposite directions, each of the pair of blades extending between a top point (see below) on the cylindrical outer surface at (occurs at tip; see below) or near a tip (see below) of the V-shape of the each vane and a base point (see below) on the cylindrical outer surface,
wherein at least one of the plurality of paddles or at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles is mounted in the central area (see Fig. 3; paddle [164] is mounted in central area) of the cylindrical outer surface of the feed roll and extends from one blade of the pair of blades to the other blade of the pair of the blades (paddle [146] extends between the base points of the blades of the vanes, see Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the at least one of the plurality of paddles (paddle [164] extends between base points of vane) or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles (portion of paddle [124] is mounted between base points through use of [123]; see below) is mounted between the base points (see above) of at least one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes [132].
PNG
media_image2.png
316
370
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 3 and 18, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the at least one of the plurality of paddles (paddle [164] extends between base points of vane) or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles (portion of paddle [124] extends between base points, see below) extends between the base points (see above) of the at least one of the V- shaped vanes [132].
PNG
media_image3.png
323
372
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 4 and 19, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the at least one of the plurality of paddles [124] or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles has an upwardly open gap (see below) in a central area (see below) thereof.
PNG
media_image4.png
193
256
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the plurality of V-shaped vanes [132] are placed one behind another without overlap between consecutive V-shaped vanes (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the at least one of the plurality of paddles or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles (portion of the paddle [124] is mounted between through use of [123]; see below) is mounted between the top point (see below) of a first adjacent one (see below) of the plurality of V-shaped vanes [132] and the base points (see below) of a second adjacent one (see below) of the plurality of V-shaped vanes.
PNG
media_image5.png
540
366
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the top points (see above) of the plurality of V-shaped vanes [132] coincide so that each of the plurality of V-shaped vanes have a top rib [146].
Regarding claim 14, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the top rib [146] of each of the plurality of V-shaped vanes [132] is reinforced by a plate element (top rib is a plate element, see Fig. 3; see paragraph [0034], lines 11-18).
Regarding claim 15, Bortner et al. teaches a combine harvester [10] comprising:
a feeder [12];
one or more threshing rotors [22];
and a feed roll [16] comprising:
a cylindrical outer surface [104];
a plurality of paddles ([124 and 164]; upright walls capable of deflecting stones or other objects, therefore, are both paddles) mounted upright on the cylindrical outer surface and oriented essentially parallel to a rotation axis [108] of the feed roll;
a plurality of V-shaped vanes [132] mounted upright on the cylindrical outer surface in a central area (see below) thereof, and guide respective flows of crops towards the threshing rotors (see paragraph [0040], lines 1-9), each of the plurality of V-shaped vanes comprising a pair of blades [136 and 138] tapering outwardly in opposite directions, each of the pair of blades extending between a top point (see below) on the cylindrical outer surface at (occurs at tip; see below) or near a tip (see below) of the V-shape of the each vane and a base point (see below) on the cylindrical outer surface,
wherein at least one of the plurality of paddles or at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles is mounted in the central area (see Fig. 3; paddle [164] is mounted in central area) of the cylindrical outer surface of the feed roll and extends from one blade of the pair of blades to the other blade of the pair of the blades (paddle [146] extends between the base points of the blades of the vanes, see Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Bortner et al. teaches wherein the feed roll [16] is mounted between (see Fig. 1) the feeder [12] and the one or more threshing rotors [22].
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) 5 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bortner et al. (US 20230157211 A1) in view of Bischoff (DE 102007031807 A1).
Regarding claims 5 and 20, Bortner et al. discloses the feed roll as applied above, but fails to disclose wherein a height of the at least one of the plurality of paddles or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles at a bottom of the upwardly open gap is up to one half or up to one third of the height of the at least one of the plurality of paddles or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles outside the upwardly open gap.
Bischoff discloses a similar feed roll [28] wherein a height (see below) of the at least one of the plurality of paddles [94] or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles at a bottom (see below) of the upwardly open gap (see below) is up to one half (see below) or up to one third of the height of the at least one of the plurality of paddles or the at least one portion of the at least one of the plurality of paddles outside the upwardly open gap (see below).
PNG
media_image6.png
319
317
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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 paddle of Bortner et al. with the paddle of Bischoff since both are mechanisms that engage with crop material to direct it towards the threshing section; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
Claim(s) 6-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bortner et al. (US 20230157211 A1) in view of Singh et al. (US 11266072 B2).
Regarding claim 6, Bortner et al. discloses the feed roll as applied above, but fails to disclose at least one intermediate paddle, wherein the at least one intermediate paddle or at least one portion of the at least one intermediate paddle is mounted between the pair of blades of at least one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes, at one or more intermediate locations between the top points and the base points of the pair of blades of the at least one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes.
Singh et al. discloses a similar feed roll [22] comprising of at least one intermediate paddle (see below), wherein the at least one intermediate paddle or at least one portion of the at least one intermediate paddle is mounted between the pair of blades (see below) of at least one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes (see below), at one or more intermediate locations (see Fig. 4) between the top points (see below) and the base points (see below) of the pair of blades of the at least one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes (please see 112(b) rejection above).
PNG
media_image7.png
503
582
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the intermediate paddle of Singh et al. on the feed roll of Bortner et al. in order to provide support for the vanes (see Singh et al. Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, Singh et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the at least one intermediate paddle (see above) or the at least one portion of the at least one intermediate paddle extends (intermediate paddle has an extension that extends between the pair of blades; see below) between the pair of blades (see above) of the at least one of the plurality of V-shape vanes (see above) at the one or more intermediate locations (see Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image8.png
508
575
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Singh et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the at least one intermediate paddle (see above) or the at least one portion of the at least one intermediate paddle has an upwardly open gap (see below) in a central area (see below) thereof.
PNG
media_image9.png
343
449
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Singh et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein a height (see below) of the at least one intermediate paddle (see above) or the at least one portion of the at least one intermediate paddle at a bottom (see below) of the upwardly open gap (see above) is up to one half (see below) or up to one third of the height of the at least one intermediate paddle or the at least one portion of the at least one intermediate paddle outside the upwardly open gap (see below).
PNG
media_image10.png
360
444
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Bortner et al. discloses the feed roll as applied above, but fails to disclose wherein the plurality of V-shaped vanes are mutually overlapping such that the top point of one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes is located between the blades of a subsequent one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes.
Singh et al. discloses wherein the plurality of V-shaped vanes (see below) are mutually overlapping (see Fig. 4) such that the top point (see below) of one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes is located between the blades (see below) of a subsequent one of the plurality of V- shaped vanes.
PNG
media_image11.png
418
484
media_image11.png
Greyscale
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 V-shaped vanes of Bortner et al. with the V- shaped vanes of Singh et al. since both are accelerating and directing the crop material towards the threshing equipment; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
Response to Arguments
Please see updated art rejections above in response to applicant’s claim amendments.
Applicant’s remarks, pages 1-2, argues that “Bortner is silent as to the paddle or at least the portion of the paddle mounted between the pair of blades at a location between the top points and the base points of the pair of blades” and, due to being silent on this, cannot teach a paddle that “extends from one blade of the pair of blades to the other blade of the pair of the blades” as added in independent claims 1 and 15.
However, applicant’s arguments are taken from claim 6, in which Bortner relies on Singh et al. to teach an intermediate paddle mounted “at one or more intermediate locations between the top points and the base points of the pair of blades of the at least one of the plurality of V-shaped vanes.” This does not mean that Bortner fails to teach a paddle that “extends from one blade of the pair of blades to the other blade of the pair of the blades”.
As can be seen in Bortner’s paragraph [0041], lines 2-5, the paddle [164] extends between the second ends [152 and 154] of the blades [136 and 138] that make up the plurality of V-shaped vanes [132]. While these second ends are not shown in the drawings, it is set forth in Bortner’s paragraph [0038], lines 2-4 that the second ends are the flared out ends of the blades; therefore, equivalent to the base points of applicant’s blades. It can be seen then that the paddle [164] of Bortner “extends from one blade of the pair of blades to the other blade of the pair of the blades”, but does not have a paddle that is “mounted between the pair of blades at a location between the top points and the base points of the pair of blades” as set forth in claim 6.
Bortner teaches a paddle that extends between the base points of the blades of the V-shaped vanes while using Singh et al. to teach a paddle mounted at a location between the top and base points of the blades; therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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