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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on October 13, 2025 has been entered and considered and an action on the merits follows.
Specification
The proposed amendment filed on October 13, 2025 has been acknowledged and approved. The amendment sufficiently overcomes the objection to the abstract noted in the previous office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 13, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued that Schwelling ‘673 discloses the hydraulic cylinders are inside a housing. Therefore, Schwelling does not disclose claim 1. With respect to Applicant’s assertion, this argument is not found persuasive because claim 1 requires that the hydraulic cylinders arranged in pairs on two opposite sides outside of the bale chamber, and Figure 3 (see the annotated drawing below) clearly shows the hydraulic cylinders are arranged in pairs on two opposite sides outside of the bale chamber. The claim does not require that the hydraulic cylinders are arranged outside of the baler housing as shown in Figure 1 of this application.
PNG
media_image1.png
253
547
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant also argued that Schwelling ‘673 column 6, lines 35-37 merely disclose that the hydraulic cylinders can be controlled “separately and individually”, and the hydraulic cylinders of each group cannot be controlled completely independently of each other based on the subject matter as claimed in claim 1 of Schwelling. It appears that the Applicant referred to column 10, lines 35-37 instead of column 6, line 35-37 for this argument. However, this argument is not found persuasive because col. 10, lines 34-36 of Schwelling ‘673 discloses that each of the hydraulic cylinders H11 . . . H14; H21 . . . H23; H3 can be separately and individually controlled; therefore, Schwelling does disclose the hydraulic cylinder (H11 . . . H14; H21 . . . H23) of each pair of cylinders can each (the limitation “each” is interpreted as each hydraulic cylinder H11 . . . H14; H21 . . . H23) be controlled individually. It is noted that the limitation, “be controlled either selectively individually or jointly” as claimed in claim 1 can be interpreted as the claim requires either individually controlled or jointly controlled, but not both.
Applicant further argued that Schwelling’273 cannot provide any indication of the control of the hydraulic cylinders arranged in accordance with Buford ‘009. This argument has been considered. However, Buford ‘009 was not applied to rearrange the hydraulic cylinders of Schwelling ‘273 in an arrangement (i.e. arranging outside of the baler housing) in accordance with Buford ‘009.
Schwelling ‘273 discloses the cylinders move the platen (5) in two directions (i.e. forward and backward) (figs. 3 and 6). But Schwelling does not expressing disclose the cylinders are double-acting cylinders which comprise a piston rod and a piston and in which the piston has a piston surface on one side and a piston ring surface surrounding the piston rod on the other side. As noted in the rejection below, Buford ‘009 was applied to teach it is old and well known in baling/compacting art to use double-acting hydraulic cylinders (30, 32; col. 3, line 35) to drive a platen (20) in two directions. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the hydraulic cylinders of Schwelling, as double-acting cylinders, as taught by Buford ‘009, for precise control of moving the platen in two directions. Accordingly, the combination of Schwelling ‘273 in view of Buford ‘009 is proper.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-10 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) contains 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 8, the amended limitation, “depending on a press pressure selected for the pressing plate” is new matter because the original disclosure does not provide support for this specific limitation. The specification, as disclosed in paragraphs 15-16 and 32, as an example, merely discloses the dependency on the press pressure is in the same sentence with the hydraulic cylinders. Therefore, the press pressure is related to the hydraulic cylinders and it says nothing about depending on a press pressure selected for the pressing plate. Accordingly, the limitation, “depending on a press pressure selected for the pressing plate” is clearly more specific and it constitutes new matter.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schwelling (US 10,471,673).
Regarding claim 1, Schwelling discloses a baler (1, see the drawing and abstract) with a baler housing (2) surrounding a bale chamber (3) and with a pressing plate (5) that is movable (see figs. 3 and 6) in the baler housing (2) and which can be driven by hydraulic cylinders (H11- 14... H21-23) arranged in pairs on two opposite sides outside the bale chamber (3), the baler (1) comprising a hydraulic control device (Fig. 11) by means of which the hydraulic cylinders of each pair of cylinders can each be controlled either selectively individually or jointly, depending on a press pressure of the pressing plate (see col. 10, line 34-41).
Regarding claim 2, the baler (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein, in the case of individual control of a respective hydraulic cylinder of each side, the hydraulic cylinders “can be” controlled crosswise (see fig. 11, one example shows a drive assembly A2 can control the hydraulic cylinders H12 and H22, which located crosswise from one another (see fig. 4)).
Regarding claim 3, the baler (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein for the actuation of the hydraulic cylinders a hydraulic main switching valve and a hydraulic pressure switching valve (20) are provided, which can be controlled by the hydraulic control device (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, the baler (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the hydraulic cylinders (H11-14) are each connected to one another by a top-side transverse yoke (see a portion where a reference (8) pointed to in figure 6) and/or a bottom-side lower yoke (9).
Regarding claim 5, the baler (1) as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a guide (see “mechanical guides of the pressing plate 5” in col. 7, line 34) for the pressing plate (5) formed in the baler housing.
Regarding claim 6, the baler (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein in that the pressing plate (4) is assigned a position sensor (30) which detects an inclined position (see “the purpose of stabilizing the pressing plate orientation” in col. 7, line 36) of the pressing plate (5) and from which position signals can be transmitted to the hydraulic control device (col. 7, lines 35-52).
Regarding claim 8, Schwelling discloses a method for operating a baler (1) with a baler housing (2) surrounding a bale chamber (3) and with a pressing plate (5) that is moveable in a baler housing (2) and which is driven by hydraulic cylinders (H11-14, H21-23) arranged in pairs on two opposite sides outside the bale chamber (3), comprising controlling (see fig. 11) each of the hydraulic cylinders of each pair of cylinders either selectively individually or jointly, depending on a press pressure of the pressing plate (see col. 10, line 34-41).
Regarding claim 9, the method as claimed in claim 8, wherein in the case of individual control of a respective hydraulic cylinder of each side, the hydraulic cylinders are controlled crosswise (see fig. 11, one example shows a drive assembly A2 can control the hydraulic cylinders H12 and H22, which located crosswise from one another (see fig. 4)).
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.
Claims 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwelling in view of Burford et al. (hereinafter “Burford”) (US 4,057,009).
Schwelling discloses the baler as set forth above, wherein the hydraulic cylinders act as pull cylinders (it is noted that the cylinders pull the platen (5) away from a bale after the bale is pressed; thus, they act as pull cylinders).
Schwelling discloses the cylinders move the platen (5) in two directions (i.e. forward and backward) (figs. 3 and 6). Schwelling does not disclose the cylinders are double-acting cylinders which comprise a piston rod and a piston and in which the piston has a piston surface on one side and a piston ring surface surrounding the piston rod on the other side.
Burford teaches it is old and well known in baling art to use double-acting hydraulic cylinders (30, 32; col. 3, line 35) to drive a platen (20) in two directions, each of the hydraulic cylinders comprises a piston rod (38) and a piston (see an element connected to the bottom end of the piston rod (38) in fig. 3) and in which the piston has a piston surface (i.e. its bottom surface in fig. 3) the on one side and a piston ring surface (i.e. it top surface in figure 3) surrounding the piston rod (38) on the other side.
It would have been obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Schwelling with the type of double-acting cylinders comprising a piston rod and a piston, in which the piston has a piston surface on one side and a piston ring surface surrounding the piston rod on the other side, as taught by Burford, since the double-acting cylinders are old and well known in baling art to drive a platen in two directions, and both type of cylinders (Schwelling and Burford) work equally as well, one skilled in the art would make a choice for convenience or economic reason.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JIMMY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4520. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-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 L TEMPLETON can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
JIMMY T. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3725
/JIMMY T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725