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 § 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.
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) 1-3, 5, 7, 8, 11, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaver US4007744 in view of Mayerle US20180070534.
Regarding claim 1, Shaver teaches a separating device for arrangement on a harvesting machine (Figure 1), characterized in that the separating device can be arranged at the outlet area (top of 23) for the wastage of the harvesting machine and has at least one rotating separating element 24, with which a material stream (the doted portion of figure 1) substantially consisting of weed seeds and lost crops (the grain and chaff described in Column 1: 50-52 and Column 2: 17-21) is separated from the wastage outflow of the harvesting machine; and wherein said wastage outflow is the material remaining after separation of harvested crops in a cleaning system (such as 23, which moves crop, and at least nominally provides separation due to the movement of crop and gravity removing at least a nominal amount of crop from the main stream of crop) of the harvesting machine.
Shaver teaches the invention substantially as claimed, as described above, but does not teach the separating device is modular, wherein components of the separating device are connected to one another and can be detachably connected to the harvesting machine such that the separating device can be removed from the harvesting machine as a module.
Mayerle teaches that it is well-known in the art for a separating device 9 (Figure 1) is modular (shown attached to combine harvester 1, shown as a module in Figure 2) that can be detachably connected to the harvester machine such that the separating device can be removed as a module (wherein 9 is shown as a module in Figure 2-3, and is shown attached to the bottom and rear of 1) to enable replacement and repair (wherein removable or replaceable parts are used when those parts are damaged or worn as described in ¶0121). Figure 2 shows 9 as a module with attachment means 13a for housing 10, as described in ¶0171 (“The end walls 13 include attachment means 13A for attachment of the housing to the outlet of a combine harvester for discharge of straw and optionally chaff from the combine harvester into an inlet opening 15 of the housing 10”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Shaver’s arrangement for the separating device on the harvesting machine in view of Mayerle’s module separating device with a reasonable expectation of success to enable selective removal of the separating device as a module for repair.
Regarding claim 2, Shaver teaches the separating device according to claim 1, characterized in that the separating device has at least one conveying element 31/32 downstream of the rotating separating element.
Regarding claim 3, Shaver teaches the separating device according to claim 2, characterized in that a decoupling unit 28 for decoupling the rotating separating element and the conveying element (wherein 28 physically separates 24 and 31/32, thus is considered to be a decoupling unit. It is noted there are no further structural limitations directed to the decoupling unit) is arranged at least at the outlet 28 on the passage side of the rotating separating element.
Regarding claim 5, Shaver teaches the separating device according to claim 1, characterized in that a discharge area (between 31 and 32) is arranged at the outlet on the passage side of the rotating separating element, which discharge area opens into a collection area 43 for the material stream substantially consisting of weed seeds and lost crops (the chaff and grain described above).
Regarding claim 7, Shaver teaches the separating device according to claim 1,characterized in that the rotating separating element is a drum screen (screen 27).
Regarding claim 8, Shaver teaches the separating device according to claim 7, characterized in that the drum screen is loaded from the outside with the wastage outflow of the harvesting machine (wherein 23 moves the wastage outflow from outside the drum screen).
Regarding claim 11, Shaver teaches a combine harvester (Figure 1) having a separating device according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, Shaver teaches the combine harvester according to claim 11, characterized in that the axis of rotation 26 of the rotating separating element of the separating device is arranged transversely to the longitudinal vehicle axis (left to right of Figure 1) of the combine harvester.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huether US3373871 in view of Mayerle.
Regarding claim 1, Huether teaches a separating device 16 for arrangement on a harvesting machine (Figure 1), characterized in that the separating device can be arranged at the outlet area 14 for the wastage of the harvesting machine and has at least one rotating separating element 37, with which a material stream (cleaning the grains as described in Column 3: 17-22) substantially consisting of weed seeds and lost crops (the grain and chaff described in Column 3: 23-31) is separated from the wastage outflow of the harvesting machine, and wherein said wastage outflow is the material remaining after separation of harvested crops in a cleaning system 15 (wherein thrashing is considered to provide the claimed separation and cleaning) of the harvesting machine.
Huether teaches the invention substantially as claimed, as described above, but does not teach the separating device is modular, wherein components of the separating device are connected to one another and can be detachably connected to the harvesting machine such that the separating device can be removed from the harvesting machine as a module.
Mayerle teaches that it is well-known in the art for a separating device 9 (Figure 1) is modular (shown attached to combine harvester 1, shown as a module in Figure 2) that can be detachably connected to the harvester machine such that the separating device can be removed as a module (wherein 9 is shown as a module in Figure 2-3, and is shown attached to the bottom and rear of 1) to enable replacement and repair (wherein removable or replaceable parts are used when those parts are damaged or worn as described in ¶0121).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Huether’s arrangement for the separating device on the harvesting machine in view of Mayerle’s module separating device with a reasonable expectation of success to enable selective removal of the separating device as a module for repair.
Regarding claim 2, Huether teaches the separating device according to claim 1, characterized in that the separating device has at least one conveying element upstream or downstream of the rotating separating element or a combination of both.
Regarding claim 3, Huether teaches the separating device according to claim 2, characterized in that a decoupling unit 39 for decoupling the rotating separating element and the conveying element (wherein 39 separates 37 from 20 and 21, thus is considering a decoupling unit) is arranged at least at the outlet on the passage side (bottom of 37) of the rotating separating element.
Regarding claim 4, Huether teaches the separating device according to claim 1, characterized in that the separating device has at least two rotating separating elements (Figure 3-4 shows at least two rotating separating elements 27), between which at least one conveying element 20/21 is arranged (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 5, Huether teaches the separating device according to claim 1, characterized in that a discharge area (bottom of 37) is arranged at the outlet on the passage side of the rotating separating element, which discharge area opens into a collection area 20a for the material stream substantially consisting of weed seeds and lost crops (the above described grain and chaff).
Regarding claim 7, Huether teaches the separating device according to claim 1, characterized in that the rotating separating element is a drum screen (with holes 37a, 38a).
Regarding claim 8, Huether teaches the separating device according to claim 7, characterized in that the drum screen is loaded from the outside (Figure 3 shows outside loading from 17) with the wastage outflow of the harvesting machine.
Regarding claim 9, Huether teaches the separating device according to claim 8, characterized in that the drum screen has exchangeable screen elements (Figure 5-7 shows outer screen is shiftable relative to inner screen to change the holes sizes, thus is considered to be exchangeable screen elements, since the two layers of screens are able to be changed to change the hole sizes).
Regarding claim 10, Huether teaches the separating device according claim 8, characterized in that the separating device has at least two drum screens (the multiple drums 27 shown in Figure 3-4) arranged one after the other as rotating separating elements (as described above), between each of which at least one conveying element 20/21 is arranged (best shown in Figure 2), and of which the screen hole sizes can be the same or different from one another (wherein the screen hole sizes are selectable as described above).
Regarding claim 11, Huether teaches a combine harvester (Figure 1) having a separating device according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, Huether teaches a method for separating weed seeds and lost crops from the wastage outflow of a harvesting machine (Figure 1), having at least the following method steps:
i. feeding the wastage outflow to a separating device 16 arranged on the harvesting machine and having at least one rotating separating element 37;
ii. separating the wastage outflow with at least one rotating separating element of the separating device into a material stream substantially consisting of weed seeds (the stream of material falling from 17 to drum 24) and lost crops and a material stream substantially consisting of non-grain constituents (out of 18);
iii. feeding the material stream substantially consisting of weed seeds and lost crops to a collection area 20a and discharging the material stream substantially consisting of non-grain constituents onto the field (indicated in Figure 1 as the three downwardly pointed arrows from 18), and wherein said wastage outflow is the material remaining after separation of harvested crops in a cleaning system of the harvesting machine (as recited above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's arguments that Heuther does not teach a wastage outflow are refuted. Heuther provides a thrashing cylinder 15 that separates the grain from the chaff. This is considered the cleaning stream. The claim does not have structural limitations further defining the cleaning stream or the location of the separating device. Therefore, the separating device 16 is after the cleaning stream in 15.
Applicant's arguments that Heuther does not target weed seeds as a material class is not persuasive. As described previously, Huether does describe chaff, which is notoriously well known in the art as non-grain constituents.
Applicant's arguments that modular and a system with replaceable internal parts are not the same are refuted. The term modular, according to Merriam Webster dictionary includes "constructed with standardized units or dimensions for flexibility and variety in use". Therefore, replacement parts are, indeed, modular, as they are all standardized units. The claim does not have details of what parts are required to be part of the module for removal.
Further, Mayerle teaches ¶171 attachment means 13a for housing 10 for chopper. Figure 2 shows chopper housing 10 as a unit/module with attachment 13a for attachment of the housing 10, therefore indicating that 9 is a module.
Applicant's arguments that Shaver would be impermissibly changed from its principle of operation are not persuasive. As described in Mayerle, enabling repair for parts is a notoriously well-known reason to have parts be removable as a module.
Applicant's argument that Mayerle is directed to high-speed rotors, etc., are not on point, as Mayerle was relied upon to teach that it is known to replace parts for repair, and was not relied upon to teach which parts are replaced for repair.
Therefore, applicant’s arguments regarding dependent claims are similarly refuted.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mayerle US2020/0296896 teaches a modular chopper 10 with attachment means 13a to attach to outlet 104 ¶0133.
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 Cathleen Hutchins whose telephone number is (571)270-3651. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11am-9:30PM EST.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571)272-5405. 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.
/CATHLEEN R HUTCHINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672 3/31/2026