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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “comprising the steps of,” should read “comprising the steps of:”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 1 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 1 recites the limitation, “the respective rear wheel drive motors” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brewer (US 6089343) in view of Eberly (US 20230219407).
Regarding claim 1, Brewer teaches a two-wheel drive steering conversion for a converted four-wheel drive zero turn lawn equipment (Col. 1, lines 52-62, Figs. 1 and 3) comprising the steps of,
a. providing a four-wheel drive steering conversion on a zero-turn lawn equipment (Col. 1, lines 52-62),
b. removing the rear drive wheels from the respective rear wheel drive motor (Col. 1, lines 52-62; Col. 2, lines 46-52; the mower contains driving engine and the rear drive wheels are removed from connection to that engine when they are swapped with a non-driven rear axle),
Brewer does not teach multiple motors for the rear drive wheels or the two-wheel drive steering conversion comprising mounting a pair of rear trailing caster wheel assemblies.
However, Eberly teaches a four wheel drive lawnmower with drive motors 25 for all four drive wheels 11, 28 ([0025] and [0030]-[0031], Figs. 2-3 of Eberly) wherein the rear drive wheels 28 can be removed from their respective drive motors ([0030] of Eberly; the drive wheels are mounted to the motors, and thus can be removed through reversibility), and wherein the two-wheel drive steering conversion comprises mounting a pair of rear trailing caster wheel assemblies 22 to the lawn care equipment frame 16 in spaced relation to said respective rear wheel drive motor 25 ([0029], Figs. 1-3 of Eberly).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the convertible lawn equipment of Brewer to have each drive wheel be removably connected to its own respective motor in order to advantageously provide direct drive to the drive wheels ([0030]) and to substitute the non-driven axle and wheels of Brewer with the castor wheel assemblies of Eberly in order to advantageously provide a wide variety of operable use to the lawnmower (Abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Brewer as modified teaches wherein said rear wheel assemblies 16 comprise, apertured mounting brackets 48 (Col. 3, lines 5-14, Fig. 8), a right-angle bracket 78, 80 extending therefrom (Col. 3, lines 45-51, Fig. 8), a pivot wheel 20 mounted on the end thereof (Col. 3, lines 43-48, Fig. 8; the axle unit of the non-driven wheels is mounted to an end of the right-angle brackets).
While Brewer does not teach “wherein the rear wheel assemblies are rear trailing caster wheel assemblies comprising apertured mounting brackets and a caster wheel pivot assembly extending therefrom.”, the question is what would result from the combined teachings of the references. See in re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981). Here, that result would be “the apertured mounting brackets of Brewer supporting the modified trailing caster wheel pivot assemblies of Eberly”.
Regarding claim 3, Brewer as modified teaches wherein mounting said rear trailing caster wheel assemblies on said lawn care equipment frame in spaced relation to said wheel drive motor comprises, said trailing caster wheel assemblies in spaced parallel relation to one another ([0029], Figs. 1-3 of Eberly; the caster wheel assemblies will be in a spaced, parallel relation to each other when they are substituted for the rear drive wheels).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20060000055 teaches right-angle brackets which can be used to attach casters to a vehicle.
US 3250340 teaches a tractor with individual drive motors attached to all four drive wheels which are selectively removable.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL WILLIAM WATKINS whose telephone number is (703)756-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:30 am -6:00 pm EST; Friday 8:30 am - 2:00 pm 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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571)272-6265. 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.
/N.W.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/JOHN OLSZEWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617