DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application and claims filed on January 25, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending, with claim 1 in independent claim form.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. IT 102021000021689 filed on 08/10/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a recess” of claims 7 and 11-12 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 13, recited the limitation of “a cutting edge“ is suggested to be replaced with “a first cutting edge“,
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4, 8, 13-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Edwards US Patent (7,578,462) hereinafter Edwards.
Regarding claim 1,
Edwards discloses (in fig.1-22c) a system (fig. 6a-b) for a mulcher comprising:
- a rotor (105) rotating about a rotation axis (line marked as L) in an operating direction and having a substantially cylindrical outer surface (see fig.6, the rotation axis and direction are inherent features of rotor/shaft) and,
- a plurality of tools (115/155), the plurality is shown in fig.6),
- connecting means (fig.7a) for connecting the tools (115/155) to the rotor (105),configured to fixedly connect the tools (115/155) to the rotor (105, see fig.6),
wherein said connecting means (fig.7a) comprise, for each tool (115/155),
a respective tool holder (110,135) having a base portion (110), configured to be fixedly mounted on said outer surface of said rotor (105, see fig.6), and
a mounting portion (135), configured to allow the tool (115/155) to be fixedly mounted on the tool holder (110,135),
wherein each of said tools (155) comprises a first blade (fig.19-22) arranged in a front upper portion of the tool (155) and having a cutting edge extending substantially parallel to the rotation axis of the rotor (105, see fig.6) and directed towards said operating direction (see fig.6),
PNG
media_image1.png
705
590
media_image1.png
Greyscale
characterized in that each of said tools (155) comprises a second blade (fig. 19-22) arranged in a front lower portion of the tool (fig. 19-22) and comprising two faces (see fig. 22) angled to each other which join to form a second cutting edge (see fig. 22), said second cutting edge extending transversely with respect to the outer surface of the rotor (105, see fig.6) and being positioned centrally with respect to the first cutting edge of the first blade (see fig. 19-22).
Regarding claim 2,
Edwards further discloses wherein the first cutting edge (fig. 19-22) and the second cutting edge (fig. 19-22) are arranged so as to cut tangentially with respect to the rotational movement of the tool in the operating direction (see fig.6 and 19-22).
Regarding claim 3,
Edwards further discloses wherein the second cutting edge (fig. 19-22) extends substantially in a radial direction with respect to the substantially cylindrical outer surface of the rotor (see fig.6 and 19-22).
Regarding claim 4,
Edwards further discloses wherein said mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) has a front side, a rear side and an upper side (see fig.7a),
wherein each tool (155) comprises a rear lower projection (160) configured to be inserted into a corresponding seat (140) formed in the front side of the mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) and having a back wall (146) towards which a rear surface (see fig.20) of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool faces,
wherein said rear lower projection (160) of the tool is provided with at least one threaded coupling hole (190), open towards the rear surface of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool,
wherein at least one coupling through-hole (145) corresponding to said at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of said tool is provided in said mounting portion (135) of said tool holder (110,135), said at least one coupling through-hole (145) extending from the back wall of the seat (140) of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135) to a rear surface of the rear side of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135, see fig.7a) and being arranged coaxially with the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, and
wherein said connecting means comprise at least one screw (according to col.7 lines 11-12 the hole element 190 are threaded therefore it is interpreted to be inherent receiving fastener such as screw or bolt) configured to be inserted into the at least one coupling through-hole (145) of the tool holder and to engage in the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, so as to keep the tool (155) secured to the tool holder (110,135).
Regarding claim 8,
Edwards further discloses wherein the first blade (fig.19-22) is made as a single piece with the tool (155).
Regarding claim 13,
Edwards further discloses wherein said mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) has a front side, a rear side and an upper side (see fig.7a),
wherein each tool (155) comprises a rear lower projection (160) configured to be inserted into a corresponding seat (140) formed in the front side of the mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) and having a back wall (146) towards which a rear surface (see fig.20) of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool faces,
wherein said rear lower projection (160) of the tool is provided with at least one threaded coupling hole (190), open towards the rear surface of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool,
wherein at least one coupling through-hole (145) corresponding to said at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of said tool is provided in said mounting portion (135) of said tool holder (110,135), said at least one coupling through-hole (145) extending from the back wall of the seat (140) of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135) to a rear surface of the rear side of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135, see fig.7a) and being arranged coaxially with the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, and
wherein said connecting means comprise at least one screw (according to col.7 lines 11-12 the hole element 190 are threaded therefore it is interpreted to be inherent receiving fastener such as screw or bolt) configured to be inserted into the at least one coupling through-hole (145) of the tool holder and to engage in the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, so as to keep the tool (155) secured to the tool holder (110,135).
Regarding claim 14,
Edwards further discloses wherein said mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) has a front side, a rear side and an upper side (see fig.7a),
wherein each tool (155) comprises a rear lower projection (160) configured to be inserted into a corresponding seat (140) formed in the front side of the mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) and having a back wall (146) towards which a rear surface (see fig.20) of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool faces,
wherein said rear lower projection (160) of the tool is provided with at least one threaded coupling hole (190), open towards the rear surface of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool,
wherein at least one coupling through-hole (145) corresponding to said at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of said tool is provided in said mounting portion (135) of said tool holder (110,135), said at least one coupling through-hole (145) extending from the back wall of the seat (140) of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135) to a rear surface of the rear side of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135, see fig.7a) and being arranged coaxially with the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, and
wherein said connecting means comprise at least one screw (according to col.7 lines 11-12 the hole element 190 are threaded therefore it is interpreted to be inherent receiving fastener such as screw or bolt) configured to be inserted into the at least one coupling through-hole (145) of the tool holder and to engage in the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, so as to keep the tool (155) secured to the tool holder (110,135).
Regarding claim 15,
Edwards further discloses wherein the second cutting edge (fig. 19-22) extends substantially in a radial direction with respect to the substantially cylindrical outer surface of the rotor (see fig.6 and 19-22).
Regarding claim 16,
Edwards further discloses wherein said mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) has a front side, a rear side and an upper side (see fig.7a),
wherein each tool (155) comprises a rear lower projection (160) configured to be inserted into a corresponding seat (140) formed in the front side of the mounting portion (135) of the tool holder (110,135) and having a back wall (146) towards which a rear surface (see fig.20) of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool faces,
wherein said rear lower projection (160) of the tool is provided with at least one threaded coupling hole (190), open towards the rear surface of the rear lower projection (160) of the tool,
wherein at least one coupling through-hole (145) corresponding to said at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of said tool is provided in said mounting portion (135) of said tool holder (110,135), said at least one coupling through-hole (145) extending from the back wall of the seat (140) of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135) to a rear surface of the rear side of the mounting portion of the tool holder (110,135, see fig.7a) and being arranged coaxially with the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, and
wherein said connecting means comprise at least one screw (according to col.7 lines 11-12 the hole element 190 are threaded therefore it is interpreted to be inherent receiving fastener such as screw or bolt) configured to be inserted into the at least one coupling through-hole (145) of the tool holder and to engage in the corresponding at least one coupling hole (190) of said rear lower projection (160) of the tool, so as to keep the tool (155) secured to the tool holder (110,135).
Regarding claim 17,
Edwards further discloses wherein the first blade (fig.19-22) is made as a single piece with the tool (155).
Regarding claim 19,
Edwards further discloses wherein the first blade (fig.19-22) is made as a single piece with the tool (155).
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 9,18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards US Patent (7,578,462) hereinafter Edwards.
Regarding claim 9,
The prior art Edwards discloses all limitations of claim 2,
Edwards discloses the first blade to be coupled to the tool (see fig.19-22 in claim 1) but is silent about the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool and since no criticality is recited for the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool and well known in the mechanical art for two structures to be coupled integrally or in separated manner which would be deemed suitable for specific operation and ensure effectiveness of operation, and that such is not non- obvious, occurs during routine engineering practices and experimentation and does not in itself warrant patentability, therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to have the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool to ensure effectiveness of operation or reducing on maintenance time. Accordingly, it has been held that that the use of one-piece construction instead of the structure disclosed several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit, would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 18,
The prior art Edwards discloses all limitations of claim 15,
Edwards discloses the first blade to be coupled to the tool (see fig.19-22 in claim 1) but is silent about the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool and since no criticality is recited for the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool and well known in the mechanical art for two structures to be coupled integrally or in separated manner which would be deemed suitable for specific operation and ensure effectiveness of operation, and that such is not non- obvious, occurs during routine engineering practices and experimentation and does not in itself warrant patentability, therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to have the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool to ensure effectiveness of operation or reducing on maintenance time. Accordingly, it has been held that that the use of one-piece construction instead of the structure disclosed several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit, would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 20,
The prior art Edwards discloses all limitations of claim 1,
Edwards discloses the first blade to be coupled to the tool (see fig.19-22 in claim 1) but is silent about the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool and since no criticality is recited for the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool and well known in the mechanical art for two structures to be coupled integrally or in separated manner which would be deemed suitable for specific operation and ensure effectiveness of operation, and that such is not non- obvious, occurs during routine engineering practices and experimentation and does not in itself warrant patentability, therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to have the first blade to be removably coupled to the tool to ensure effectiveness of operation or reducing on maintenance time. Accordingly, it has been held that that the use of one-piece construction instead of the structure disclosed several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit, would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Claims 5-7 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards US Patent (7,578,462) hereinafter Edwards in view of King DE Publication (102013110289) hereinafter King.
Regarding claim 5,
The prior art Edwards discloses all limitations of claim 4,
Edwards is silent about wherein a gap to be provided between said rear surface of the rear lower projection of the tool and said back wall of the seat of the tool holder.
Edwards and King disclose both art in the same field of endeavor of the claimed invention (i.e. mulching tool).
King, in a similar art, teaches a mulching tool (see title) to comprise a gap (see fig.2, the gap is marked as 23) is provided between said rear surface of the rear lower projection (46) of the tool (40) and said back wall of the seat (21) of the tool holder (10, see fig.2).
King teaches the gap to guarantee a secure installation of the tool (see pag.2 lines 4-5), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the tool of Edwards with a gap to be provided between said rear surface of the rear lower projection of the tool and said back wall of the seat of the tool holder as taught by King, as it would be beneficiary to Edwards to be able to guarantee a secure installation of the tool and ensures operational safety.
Regarding claim 6,
The prior art Edwards as modified by King, discloses all limitations of claim 5,
Edwards does not disclose wherein each tool comprises a rear upper projection having a rear surface configured to abut against a shoulder formed in the upper side of the mounting portion of the tool holder.
PNG
media_image2.png
527
503
media_image2.png
Greyscale
King, in the similar art, teaches the mulching tool (see title, see fig.1) having each tool (40) comprises a rear upper projection (41.1) having a rear surface (see fig.3) configured to abut against a shoulder (19) formed in the upper side of the mounting portion of the tool holder (10, see fig.1 and see pag.4 line 21)
King teaches the configuration of the tool and the toolholder to guarantee a secure installation of the tool (see pag.2 lines 4-5), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the tool of Edwards with each tool comprises a rear upper projection having a rear surface configured to abut against a shoulder formed in the upper side of the mounting portion of the tool holder as taught by King, as it would be beneficiary to Edwards to be able to guarantee a secure installation of the tool and ensures operational safety.
Regarding claim 7,
The prior art Edwards as modified by King, discloses all limitations of claim 5,
Edwards does not disclose the configuration of said seat of the mounting portion of the tool holder is surrounded by a projecting frame, a portion of said frame being configured to engage into a recess formed between the rear upper projection and the rear lower projection of the tool.
King, in the similar art, teaches the mulching tool (see title, see fig.1) having the configuration of said seat (21) of the mounting portion (see fig.1) of the tool holder (10) is surrounded by a projecting frame (marked as 18, 19 and 20), a portion (19 and 20) of said frame (marked as 18, 19 and 20) being configured to engage into a recess (space between elements 41.1 and 46 see fig.3 and 4) formed between the rear upper projection (41.1) and the rear lower projection (46) of the tool (40, see fig.1 and 3-4).
King teaches the configuration of the projecting frame and recess to guarantee a secure installation of the tool (see pag.2 lines 4-5), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the tool of Edwards with the seat of the mounting portion of the tool holder to be surrounded by a projecting frame, a portion of said frame to be configured to engage into a recess formed between the rear upper projection and the rear lower projection of the tool as taught by King, as it would be beneficiary to Edwards to be able to guarantee a secure installation of the tool and ensures operational safety.
Regarding claim 10,
The prior art Edwards discloses all limitations of claim 4,
Edwards does not disclose wherein each tool comprises a rear upper projection having a rear surface configured to abut against a shoulder formed in the upper side of the mounting portion of the tool holder.
King, in the similar art, teaches a mulching tool (see title, see fig.1) having each tool (40) comprises a rear upper projection (41.1) having a rear surface (see fig.3) configured to abut against a shoulder (19) formed in the upper side of the mounting portion of the tool holder (10, see fig.1 and see pag.4 line 21)
King teaches the configuration of the tool and the toolholder to guarantee a secure installation of the tool (see pag.2 lines 4-5), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the tool of Edwards with each tool comprises a rear upper projection having a rear surface configured to abut against a shoulder formed in the upper side of the mounting portion of the tool holder as taught by King, as it would be beneficiary to Edwards to be able to guarantee a secure installation of the tool and ensures operational safety.
Regarding claim 11,
The prior art Edwards as modified by King, discloses all limitations of claim 10,
Edwards does not disclose the configuration of said seat of the mounting portion of the tool holder is surrounded by a projecting frame, a portion of said frame being configured to engage into a recess formed between the rear upper projection and the rear lower projection of the tool.
King, in the similar art, teaches the mulching tool (see title, see fig.1) having the configuration of said seat (21) of the mounting portion (see fig.1) of the tool holder (10) is surrounded by a projecting frame (marked as 18, 19 and 20), a portion (19 and 20) of said frame (marked as 18, 19 and 20) being configured to engage into a recess (space between elements 41.1 and 46 see fig.3 and 4) formed between the rear upper projection (41.1) and the rear lower projection (46) of the tool (40, see fig.1 and 3-4).
King teaches the configuration of the projecting frame and recess to guarantee a secure installation of the tool (see pag.2 lines 4-5), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the tool of Edwards with the seat of the mounting portion of the tool holder to be surrounded by a projecting frame, a portion of said frame to be configured to engage into a recess formed between the rear upper projection and the rear lower projection of the tool as taught by King, as it would be beneficiary to Edwards to be able to guarantee a secure installation of the tool and ensures operational safety.
Regarding claim 12,
The prior art Edwards discloses all limitations of claim 4,
Edwards does not disclose the configuration of said seat of the mounting portion of the tool holder is surrounded by a projecting frame, a portion of said frame being configured to engage into a recess formed between the rear upper projection and the rear lower projection of the tool.
King, in the similar art, teaches the mulching tool (see title, see fig.1) having the configuration of said seat (21) of the mounting portion (see fig.1) of the tool holder (10) is surrounded by a projecting frame (marked as 18, 19 and 20), a portion (19 and 20) of said frame (marked as 18, 19 and 20) being configured to engage into a recess (space between elements 41.1 and 46 see fig.3 and 4) formed between the rear upper projection (41.1) and the rear lower projection (46) of the tool (40, see fig.1 and 3-4).
King teaches the configuration of the projecting frame and recess to guarantee a secure installation of the tool (see pag.2 lines 4-5), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the tool of Edwards with the seat of the mounting portion of the tool holder to be surrounded by a projecting frame, a portion of said frame to be configured to engage into a recess formed between the rear upper projection and the rear lower projection of the tool as taught by King, as it would be beneficiary to Edwards to be able to guarantee a secure installation of the tool and ensures operational safety.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Smith O. BAPTHELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-5976. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-6:00.
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.
January 16, 2026
/BSO/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725