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 .
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.
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.
Claims 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rioth (Pat. No.:164,484) in view of Friell (WO2020/112401).
Regarding independent claim 34, Rioth discloses a tool unit configured for mounting to a power source (via hook on mounting bracket G) said tool unit comprising:
i) a mounting bracket (G);
ii) a tool frame sled with a front end and a rear end (See Fig. 1 reproduced below where the front end corresponds to where member A that is closest to mounting bracket G, and the rear end corresponds to where member A that is furthest from the mounting bracket G); and
iii) a pair of flexible connectors (J) spanning between said mounting bracket (G) and said tool frame sled;
wherein said mounting bracket (G) is adapted for releasably fastening of said tool unit to a power source;
wherein each of said connectors (J) is fastened to each side of the rear end of said tool frame sled (See Fig. 1 where each of the connecters are fastened at each side of the rear end at rings E’), and
wherein said connectors (J) fastened to each side of the rear end are each looped back and again fastened to the mounting bracket (See the right column where Rioth discloses “J are two draft chains, the forward ends of which are hooked into two of the staples H… The chains J are passed through the forward rings E, and are hooked into the rear rings E’, or into the forward rings F, or are turned back upon themselves and hooked into their own links; or the chains may be passed through the forward rings F, and secured in any of the ways hereinbefore indicated”, the disclosed “turned back upon themselves” corresponds to the claimed “looped back”, and then fastened to the mounting bracket at H since Rioth discloses the connectors are “secured in any of the ways hereinbefore mentioned” corresponds to “again fastened to the mounting bracket”.)
Rioth fails to disclose wherein the power source is specifically a mobile robot, However, Friell discloses an autonomous vehicle/robot for ground maintenance operations (abstract) such as leveling (See para. [0066]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to automate the work vehicle disclosed by Rioth utilizing the autonomous vehicle/robot of Friell since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art. In re Venner, 120 USPQ 192. Further, Friell discloses that it is known for autonomous and non-autonomous vehicles to be used in the art (See para. [0080]).
PNG
media_image1.png
699
533
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-33 and 43-44 are allowed.
Claims 35-42 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 34 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Audrey L Lusk whose telephone number is (571)272-5132. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8am-5pm.
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at (571)272-0547. 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.
/A.L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights