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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group III, claims 16-20 in the reply filed on 11/20/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that group III is not patentably distinct. This is not found persuasive because the agitator can be used in different environment other than just for planting system.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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) 16, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gronau et al (US 2005/0083782).
As to claim 16, Gronau et al. disclose an agitator frame comprising:
A supporter subframe
Agitator members coupled to the support subframe, wherein the agitator members are more flexible than the support subframe (annotated figure below).
As to claim 17, support subframe includes a drive bar extending vertically, and a crossbar extending horizontally.
As to claim 19, agitator members include a side link extending from drive bar of the support subframe to a crossbar of the support subframe.
PNG
media_image1.png
521
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gronau et al (US 2005/0083782).
As to claim 18, Gronau et al. disclose agitator members, but fail to teach a loop. However, since Granau et al disclose the curved agitator configuration, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have it either curved or looped. Such modification is with the design expediency.
As to claim 20, Gronau et al. fail to teach the slant member, but instead disclose a straight member as shown in the annotated figure. However, such modification of either slant or straight would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, since it is within the design expediency.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Len Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-1184. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am - 4pm.
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.
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.
/LEN TRAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763