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 .
Specification
The amendment filed 1-30-2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: Claims 15 and 23 present: “gates to allow for flow of granular material”
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
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.
Claims 14 and 22 are 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.
Claims 14 and 22 both recite: “wherein the second power output system is configured to rotate the system of conveyors to allow for flow of the granular material”. However in the independent claims the first power system is configured to power the material moving system and the second power system is drawn to a secondary function. This renders the claim unclear as to how the second power system would rotate the conveyors if the first power system is already configured to power the material moving system.
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.
Claim(s) 6-9, 13-14, 16, 18, 21-22 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brechon (USPN 10543990).
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Brechon discloses a system (100) comprising: a granular material moving system (conveyor 124) supported on a frame (chasiss 120) having a wheel system (114/116); a portable power system (Figure 14 mid frame portion of the system pointed to by indicator 244 where all the main power components rest) connected to the frame, the PPS supporting a battery (column 9 lines 48-53), a power system (motor 244) and an input system (272) wherein: the battery supplies power to the power system (Column 9 lines 48-53 facilitating start of the motor); the power system includes: a first power output system (Column 11 lines 1-10, hydraulics to drive roller 240) configured to power the granular material moving system comprising a system of conveyors (all elements of the material moving system that aid in conveying the material), as a primary function; a second power output system configured to activate a secondary function (Any other actuated part of the machine of Brechon different from the conveyor); and, the input system is configured to enable an operator to activate the first and second power output systems (Via controls 272).
Regarding claim 7, Brechon discloses a third power output system configured a steering system configured to the wheel system and the input system is configured to enable an operator to activate the third power output system (Column 7 lines 60-67 discloses operator steering via hydraulic means).
Regarding claim 8, Brechon discloses a fourth power output system configured to the granular material moving system to rotate the granular material moving system relative to a horizontal axis (Hydraulicly powered cable and winch, Column 9 lines 34-50).
Regarding claim 9, Brechon discloses wherein the system includes a product input system (front end) and the system further comprises a fifth power output system configured to the input system to rotate the product input system relative to a horizontal axis (via actuators 160/162, column 10 lines 10-25).
Regarding claims 13 and 21, Brechon discloses a second power output to the wheels (Column 7 lines 60-67). With respect to the claim language: “to move an auger along a ground surface”; the system is capable of moving an auger such as one placed on the chassis.
Regarding claims 14 and 22, Brechon discloses wherein the first power output system is configured to rotate the system of conveyors to allow for flow of the granular material (Column 11 lines 1-10, hydraulics to drive roller 240).
Regarding claims 16 and 24, Brechon discloses wherein the secondary function is selected from the group consisting of rotary power to a shaft, pulley system, gearbox, or input to hydraulic motors or hydraulic cylinders configured to the system (Hydraulic actuators 160/162).
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) 17 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brechon (USPN 10543990) in view of Regier (USPN 3792748).
Regarding claims 17 and 25, Brechon is lacking a pivotal connection of the PPS.
Regier discloses an agricultural implement and teaches a pivotable carriage platform (42) to carry power components (engine 50) and an operator platform (56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brechon to make a pivotable carriage platform to carry the power components and the operator as taught by Regier for the purpose of keeping the power components and the operator level while operating on uneven ground surfaces.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brechon (USPN 10543990) in view of Murphy (USPN 5515961)
Regarding claim 10, Brechon discloses wherein the power system and battery system include a charge controller (alternator off motor column 9 lines 50-55 that controls charging of the battery), a motor controller (controller 272 is considered to be a motor controller) and hydraulic power system configured to provide hydraulic power to each of the first, second, third, fourth and fifth power output systems (via hydraulic pump Column 11 lines 1-10).
Brechon discloses the use of a gas motor to drive a hydraulic pump and is lacking the alternative use of an electric motor.
Murphy discloses a piece of equipment with hydraulic cylinders to operate the piece of equipment and teaches the known use of an electric motor to power a hydraulic pump (“Gasoline, diesel, or, preferably, an electric motor can supply power to the hydraulic pump.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brechon to use an electric motor and system to power the hydraulic pump as taught by Murphy as a known alternative to powering a hydraulic system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 and 19-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening 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 ADAM J BEHRENS whose telephone number is (303)297-4336. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-2pm MST.
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, Joseph M. Rocca can be reached at (571) 272-8971. 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.
/ADAM J BEHRENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights