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.
Claim 3 is 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 3 sets forth “a pair of rear wheels” in line 22. However, it is unclear how these rear wheels are related to the “one or more rear wheels” already set forth in independent claim 1, line 5, from which claim 3 depends. Specifically, it is unclear if these two sets of rear wheels are one and the same or two different sets altogether.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ward 1,786,100 in view of Ross et al. 4,024,822.
Independent Claim 1: Ward discloses a seed planting apparatus comprising:
a chassis (1, 4);
one or more rear wheels (3) coupled to a rear end of the chassis;
a seat (5) coupled to the rear end of the chassis;
a storage container (6) positioned behind the seat, wherein the storage container is detachable from the seed planting apparatus (by removal of the mechanical fasteners);
a frame (10) coupled to the chassis, wherein the frame is configured to be selectively raised and lowered by an operator of the seed planting apparatus (pg. 1, lns. 47-55);
a plurality of hollow members (12) coupled to and approximately evenly spaced along the frame (as seen in Fig. 2), as per claim 1.
However, Ward fails to disclose an air propulsion apparatus positioned behind the seat, wherein the air propulsion apparatus is detachable from the seed planting apparatus;
a seed metering apparatus coupled to the plurality of hollow members, and in communication with the air propulsion apparatus, as per claim 1.
Ross discloses a similar seed planting apparatus comprising an air propulsion apparatus (18) positioned behind the seat (of tractor 10), wherein the air propulsion apparatus is detachable from the seed planting apparatus (by removal of the mechanical fasteners);
a seed metering apparatus (20) coupled to the plurality of hollow members (37), and in communication with the air propulsion apparatus, as per claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the pneumatic and metering means Ross on the seed planting apparatus of Ward in order to sow a field readily, easily and with relatively even distribution.
Dependent Claims 2-4: Ward further a plurality of spades (13) coupled to the frame (10), wherein each of the plurality of spades is respectively positioned below each of the plurality of hollow members (12), as per claim 2;
wherein:
the seat (5) is positioned between a pair of rear wheels (3, 3) coupled to the rear end of the chassis (1, 4); and
the frame (10) is coupled to the rear end of the chassis behind the seat, as per claim 3;
wherein the frame (10) is configured to be selectively raised and lowered using a hand lever (19) within reach of an operator seated in the seat (5), as per claim 4;
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ward in view of Ross et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Randall 658,803 and Rizzo 4,821,655.
Dependent Claims 7-9: Ward and Ross discloses a seed planting system used by a single operator by the method of claims 8 and 9, the system comprising:
the seed planting apparatus of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), as per claims 7-9.
However, the combination fails to disclose a two-wheel tractor coupled to the seed planting apparatus, the two-wheel tractor comprising two independently controllable wheels, wherein each independently controllable wheel is controllable by a hand control that is within reach of an operator seated in the seat of the seed planting apparatus, as per claims 7-9.
Randall discloses a similar seeding apparatus comprising a two-wheeled tractor (12) coupled to the seed planting apparatus (1, pg. 1, lns. 97-98), as per claims 7-9.
Rizzo discloses a similar seeding apparatus (Fig. 8) comprising two independently controllable wheels (446, 446), wherein each independently controllable wheel is controllable by a hand control (620, 620, col. 11, lns. 63-65) that is within reach of an operator of the seed planting apparatus, as per claims 7-9.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the two-wheeled truck of Randall on the seed planting apparatus of Ward and Ross in order to provide full support for the planting apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the individual wheel steering of Rizzo on the seed planter of Ward and Ross since such a means of steering is old and known in the art.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ward in view of Ross et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lindgren 645,817.
Dependent Claims 5-6: The seed planting apparatus is disclosed as applied above. However, the combination fails to disclose wherein:
The seat is positioned directly above one or more caster wheels coupled to the rear end of the chassis; and
the frame is coupled to the chassis at a location on the chassis between the seat and the front edge of the chassis, as per claim 5;
wherein the frame is configured to be selectively raised and lowered using a foot pedal within reach of an operator seated in the seat, as per claim 6.
Lindgren discloses a similar seed planting apparatus wherein:
The seat (9) is positioned directly above one or more caster wheels (8) coupled to the rear end of the chassis (unnumbered); and
the frame (3) is coupled to the chassis at a location on the chassis between the seat and the front edge of the chassis (as seen in Fig. 1), as per claim 5.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the seed planting arrangement of Lindgren for that of Ward and Ross since such an arrangement is old and known in the planting art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached PTOL-892. See the applicant’s own application WO 2020/092576 A1 which shares many of the claimed features of the instant application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alicia M. Torres whose telephone number is 571-272-6997. The examiner’s fax number is 571-273-6997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph M. Rocca, can be reached at (571) 272-8971.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the group receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-3600. The fax number for this Group is 571-273-8300.
/Alicia Torres/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 October 24, 2025