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 .
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.
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) 14-15, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jura et al. (2020/0378090) in view of Chenoweth et al. (2015/0033595).
Regarding claim 14, Jura et al. discloses a tip assembly comprising:
An adapter (20) configured to be attached to a work implement, the adapter including:
A nose (21)
A retaining element (23)
A ground engaging tip (30) configured to be attached to the nose (21), the tip including:
A nose cavity (35) configured to receive the nose (21), the nose cavity (35) defining a pair of side walls (37) spaced apart from each other
A first transverse hole (40) disposed in a first one of the side walls
A second transverse hole (not shown) disposed in a second one of the side walls
A retention mechanism (50) including:
A first spring clip (70) configured to be inserted into the first transverse hole
A second spring clip (70) configured to be inserted into the second transverse hole (both retention mechanisms shown in Figure 2)
A first retainer (60) configured for insertion into the first transverse hole, the first retainer configured to engage with the pin
A second retainer (60) configured for insertion into the second transverse hole, the second retainer configured to engage with the pin (both retention mechanisms shown in Figure 2)
While Jura discloses the invention as described above, it fails to specifically disclose a retainer opening in the nose for receiving a retaining pin, but it does disclose that the retaining mechanisms (23) can be replaced with pins and support structures (pgph 0054). Like Jura, Chenoweth also discloses an adapter system for mounting a tooth to a nose for an excavating tool. Unlike Jura, Chenoweth discloses that the posts of the retention mechanism can be replaced with a removable pin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the post of Jura with a pin inside a retainer opening in the nose as taught by Chenoweth as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)).
Regarding claim 15, the combination discloses that the pin includes an elongated shank (Chenoweth) and a first frustoconical lug extending from one end of the elongated shank and a second frustoconical lug extending from an opposite end fo the elongated shank (Jura – Pgph 0023, 0030).
Regarding claim 17, the combination discloses that the pin (Chenoweth) can have various shapes (Jura – pgph 0023) but fails to specifically discloses a non cylindrical cross section. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a non cylindrical pin since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) and Jura specifically discloses that alternate shapes are possible.
Regarding claim 18, the combination discloses that each of the first spring clip (70) and the second spring clip (70) includes
At least one leg (72)
A base portion (74) extending perpendicularly from one edge of the at least one leg
A pair of flexible arms (unnumbered extending from opposite ends of the base portion (Figure 6) and configured to engage with the outer surface of the retainer body (Figure 9)
A detent portion (77) attached to a distal end of each of the flexible arms
An inner surface of the nose cavity includes a cutout (41) configured to receive the at least one leg of a respective one of the first spring clip or the second spring clip
Regarding claim 19, Jura discloses a retention mechanism comprising:
A retention element (23)
A retainer (60) including
A retainer body extending from a first axial end to a second axial end (Figure 4)
At least one tab (88) extending radially from the retainer body at the first axial end
At least one detent cutout (67) disposed on an outer surface of the retainer body
An axial cavity (69) at the second axial end configured to receive one end of the retention element (23) (pgph 0050)
A spring clip (70) including
At least one leg (72)
A base portion (74) extending perpendicularly from one edge of the at least one leg
A pair of flexible arms (unnumbered extending from opposite ends of the base portion (Figure 6) and configured to engage with the outer surface of the retainer body (Figure 9)
A detent portion (77) attached to a distal end of each of the flexible arms, wherein the detent portion is configured to engage with the at least one detent cutout of the retainer
While Jura discloses the invention as described above, it fails to specifically disclose a retainer opening in the nose for receiving a retaining pin, but it does disclose that the retaining mechanisms (23) can be replaced with pins and support structures (pgph 0054). Like Jura, Chenoweth also discloses an adapter system for mounting a tooth to a nose for an excavating tool. Unlike Jura, Chenoweth discloses that the posts of the retention mechanism can be replaced with a removable pin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the post of Jura with a pin inside a retainer opening in the nose as taught by Chenoweth as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)).
Regarding claim 20, the combination discloses that the at least one leg (72) is a bottom leg and the spring clip includes a top leg (see second leg 72 in figure 7) extending from the base portion and spaced apart from the bottom leg.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is 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.
Claims 1-13 are allowed. The retention mechanism including details requiring a spring clip inserted through a first end of a transverse hole while the retainer is inserted through the second end of the transverse hole, the at least one tab on the retainer engaging a female thread in the transverse hole while a detent receives a portion of the spring clip and an axial cavity receiving an end of the pin (as opposed to a post on the adapter) in combination reads over the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wood et al. (2022/0333358) discloses a retention mechanism where the multiple parts enter from two sides of a transverse hole.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jamie L McGowan whose telephone number is (571)272-5064. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00-5:00 CST.
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, Chris Sebesta can be reached at 571-272-0547. 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.
/JAMIE L MCGOWAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671