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
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) 1-2, 9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter US 2014/0076215 A1 in view of Zwez EP 2153709 B1. (FIRST INTERPRETATION)
Independent Claim 1: Peter discloses a seed firmer (600, Fig. 6) comprising:
a resilient portion (640, 650) for attaching to an agricultural implement;
a firming portion (680) for contacting seeds;
a layer (610) disposed over at least one of the firming portion (680) and the resilient portion, wherein the layer conforms to an external shape of the firming portion (as seen in Fig. 9), as per claim 1.
However, Peter fails to disclose wherein the layer is made from a flexible material, as per claim 1.
Zwez discloses a similar ground-engaging device wherein the layer (5) is made from a flexible material (see the boxed text of pages 1 and 13 as seen in the attached document), 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 use the flexible material of Zwez’s wear layer for the wear layer of Peter in order to prolong the life of the ground-engaging parts of the seed firmer.
Dependent Claims 2, 9-15: Zwez, of the resultant combination above, further discloses wherein the layer (5) is adhered to at least one of the firming portion (680, when combined with Peter) and the resilient portion with an adhesive (see the boxed text on page 4 of the attached document), as per claim 2.
Peter further discloses wherein the seed firmer (600) further comprises a channel (614), as per claim 13;
wherein the resilient portion (640, 650) further comprises at least one post (675), as per claim 14;
wherein the resilient portion (640, 650) further comprises a bracket (675), as per claim 15.
However, the combination fails to specifically disclose wherein the firming portion is disposed at 30 to 70% of the length of the seed firmer, as per claim 9;
wherein the firming portion is disposed at 40 to 60% of the length of the seed firmer, as per claim 10;
wherein the firming portion is disposed at 45 to 55% of the length of the seed firmer, as per claim 11;
wherein the firming portion is disposed at 50% of the length of the seed firmer, as per claim 12.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to dispose the firming portion 30-70%, 40-60%, 45-55% or 50% of the length of the seed firmer, as per claims 9-12, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would know to consider the environmental conditions of the seed and the soil to maximize the seed firming effect.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter in view of Zwez as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hagny 7,856,934.
Dependent Claims 3-4: The seed firmer is disclosed as applied above. However, the combination fails to disclose wherein the layer is made from ultra high molecular weight polyethylene, as per claim 3;
wherein the seed firmer is made from PA6 nylon, as per claim 4.
Hagny discloses a similar seed firmer (72) which can be made of nylon, polyethylene, UHMW plastic or similar materials (col. 10, lns. 21-26), as per claims 3-4.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Zwez’s layer of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene, as per claim 3, and Peter’s seed firmer of PA6 nylon, as per claim 4, in light of Hagny’s teaching that both materials are appropriate for seed firmers and parts thereof as they provide flexing capabilities but some resilience of shape such that the firmer can bend to clear obstacles but return to its previous position to firm seeds.
PLEASE NOTE the rejection below, also under Peter in view of Zwez, has the resilient portion, firming portion and layer renumbered in order to account for the limitations in some of the dependent claims.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter US 2014/0076215 A1 in view of Zwez EP 2153709 B1. (SECOND INTERPETATION)
Independent Claim 1: Peter discloses a seed firmer (600, Fig. 6) comprising:
a resilient portion (640, 650, 680) for attaching to an agricultural implement;
a firming portion (610) for contacting seeds, as per claim 1.
However, Peter fails to disclose a layer disposed over at least one of the firming portion and the resilient portion,
wherein the layer is made from a flexible material and conforms to an external shape of the firming portion, as per claim 1.
Zwez discloses a similar ground-engaging device comprising a layer (5) made from a flexible material (see the boxed text of pages 1 and 13 as seen in the attached document) and conforms to an external shape of the device (3), 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 protective layer of Zwez on the firming or resilient portion of Peter’s seed firmer in order to prolong the life of the ground-engaging parts of the seed firmer.
Dependent Claims 7-8: Peter further discloses wherein the resilient portion (640, 650, 68) has a first portion (640, 650) and a second portion (680), and the second portion of the resilient portion is inside the firming portion (610, as seen in Figs. 6 and 9), as per claim 7.
Furthermore, since Peter’s firming portion (610) is removable from the resilient portion (640, 650, 680), a first layer (Mayerle’s 52) will be disposed over the resilient portion and a second layer is disposed over the firming portion to allow for this separation, as per claim 8.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter in view of Zwez as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hagny 7,856,934.
Dependent Claims 3-4: The seed firmer is disclosed as applied above. However, the combination fails to disclose wherein the layer is made from ultra high molecular weight polyethylene, as per claim 3;
wherein the seed firmer is made from PA6 nylon, as per claim 4.
Hagny discloses a similar seed firmer (72) which can be made of nylon, polyethylene, UHMW plastic or similar materials (col. 10, lns. 21-26), as per claims 3-4.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Zwez’s layer of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene, as per claim 3, and Peter’s seed firmer of PA6 nylon, as per claim 4, in light of Hagny’s teaching that both materials are appropriate for seed firmers and parts thereof as they provide flexing capabilities but some resilience of shape such that the firmer can bend to clear obstacles but return to its previous position to firm seeds.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter in view of Zwez as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mayerle et al. 6,666,156.
Dependent Claims 5-6: The seed firmer is disclosed as applied above. However, the combination fails to disclose wherein the layer is disposed over the resilient portion and the firming portion, as per claim 5;
wherein a first layer is disposed over the resilient portion and a second layer is disposed over the firming portion, as per claim 6.
Mayerle discloses a similar seed firmer comprising a layer (52) which extends from the top resilient portion (at pivot 48) to the bottom firming portion (at the bottom rear of 30) of the seed firmer (30) (as seen in Mayerle’s Fig. 5A), 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 this length of layer as taught by Mayerle to Peter’s seed firmer (600, Fig. 6) so that the layer will be disposed over Peter’s resilient portion (640, 650, 680) and the firming portion (610), as per claim 5, so that the portions of Peter’s seed firmer which encounter friction/abrasion inside of the furrow (60, as seen in Peter’s Fig. 1) will be protected from wear.
Furthermore, since Peter’s firming portion (610) is removable from the resilient portion (640, 650, 680), a first layer (Mayerle’s 52) will be disposed over the resilient portion and a second layer is disposed over the firming portion to allow for this separation, as per claim 6.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter in view of Mayerle et al. and Hagny.
Independent Claim 16: Peter discloses a seed firmer (600, Fig. 6) comprising:
a resilient portion (640, 650, 680) for attaching to an agricultural implement, wherein the resilient portion has a first portion (640, 650) and a second portion (680);
a firming portion (610) for contacting seeds, wherein the second portion of the resilient portion is inside the firming portion (as seen in Figs. 6 and 9) and conforms to an external shape of the firming portion (as seen in Fig. 9), as per claim 16.
However, Peter fails to disclose a layer disposed over the firming portion and the resilient portion, wherein the layer is made from ultra high molecular weight polyethylene, as per claim 16.
Mayerle discloses a similar seed firmer (30) comprising a layer (52) disposed over the firming portion (51) and the resilient portion (at pivot 48), as per claim 16.
Hagny discloses wherein the layer (outer surface of 72) is made from ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (col. 10, lns. 21-26), as per claim 16.
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 layer of Mayerle on the firming portion and resilient portion of Peter’s seed firmer in order to reduce friction to the ground-engaging parts and extend the life of said parts before replacement is needed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Peter and Mayerle’s layer of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene in light of Hagny’s teaching that ultra high molecular weight polyethylene is appropriate for seed firmers and parts thereof as it provides flexing capabilities but some resilience of shape such that the firmer can bend to clear obstacles but return to its previous position to firm seeds.
Dependent Claim 17: Mayerle, of the resultant combination above, further discloses wherein the layer (52) is disposed on an external surface of the firming portion (51), as per claim 17.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter in view of Mayerle and Hagny as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Zwez.
Dependent Claim 18: The seed firmer is disclosed as applied above. However, the combination fails to disclose wherein the layer is adhered to the firming portion and the resilient portion with an adhesive, as per claim 18.
Zwez discloses a ground-engaging device wherein the layer (5) is adhered to the firming portion (680, when combined with Peter) and the resilient portion (640, 650, when combined with peter) with an adhesive (see the boxed text on page 4 of the attached document), as per claim 2.
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 adhesive connection taught by Zwez on the seed firmer of Peter, Mayerle and Hagny in order to provide a secure attachment between the temporary layer and the seed firmer.
Response to Arguments
Please see the updated art rejections above in light of applicants claim amendments and new claims.
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 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 March 25, 2026