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. 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. Introduction Claims 1-10 are currently pending in this application and are subject to examination herein. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “56” has been used to designate both height markings and return spring (Paras. [0041]-[0042]). 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “knob 22” appears to have inadvertently been recited as “knob 24” (Para. [0032]); similarly, “wheels 6, 10” appears to have been inadvertently recited as “wheels 6, 1” (para. [0039]). Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation The Examiner notes that Applicants have used the phrase “and/or” in claim 1 . The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has held that use of the phrase "and/or” within a claim is not indefinite per se . See Ex Parte Gross , Appeal No. 2011-004811 (Jan. 2014). Nevertheless, “[d] uring patent examination, the pending claims must be ‘ given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. ’ ” MPEP § 2111; Phillips v. AWH Corp. , 415 F.3d 1303, 1316, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005) . Based upon this guidance from the MPEP and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the Examiner interprets the phrase "and/or" under its broadest reasonable interpretation of "or" for purposes of examination of the instant Application. Claim Objections Claim s 4, 6-7 and 9-10 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim cannot depend from another multiple dependent claim . See MPEP § 608.01(n). Similarly, claim 8 depends back to an (improper) multiple dependent claim and is, therefore, likewise objected under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form. Accordingly, the claim s 4 and 6-10 have not been further treated on the merits. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5 does not “contain a reference to a claim previously set forth” as required by 35 U.S.C. 112(d) but, instead, contains a circular dependency to itself (“5. A height adjustment mechanism according to claim 5 . . .") . Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Because the scope of claim 5 cannot be determined as presently recited, the Examiner is unable to examine claim 5 on the merits herein. Allowable Subject Matter & Examiner's Reasons For Allowance Claims 1-3 ar e allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to disclose or otherwise teach the combination of limitations claimed in the aforementioned claims. In particular regarding independent claim 1, the prior art does not disclose or otherwise teach the claimed combination and, in particular, does not teach the limitation “ characterised in that the cam mechanism comprises two semi-circular stepped surfaces and in that the cam follower comprises two complimentary engagement surfaces, each respective stepped surface of the cam mechanism mating with a corresponding respective engagement surface of the cam follower. ” The closest prior art to Claim 1 appears to be U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2019/0387676 to Welz et al. (hereinafter Welz ). However, while Welz teaches a stepped cam mechanism (see Figs. 2-4) that adjusts the height of cut in response to turning the height of cut knob 130. However, Welz does not disclose or otherwise teach that the cam mechanism comprises two semi-circular stepped surfaces and the cam follower comprises two complimentary engagement surfaces wherein each respective stepped surfaces of the cam mechanism mates with a corresponding respective engagement surface of the cam follower. European Pat. Pub. No. 3 178 305 B1 to Reichard also teaches a grass mower with a stepped cam surface (see Figs. 2 and 7-9; Paras. [0016], [0035]-[0036]) similar to that disclosed in the instant invention, but Reichard also does not disclose or teach the cam mechanism cam mechanism comprises two semi-circular stepped surfaces and the cam follower comprises two complimentary engagement surfaces wherein each respective stepped surfaces of the cam mechanism mates with a corresponding respective engagement surface of the cam follower. U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2023/0371427 to Lai et al. relates to a lawn mower that has a manual height adjustment knob and that does have two semicircular helical surfaces (See Figs. 4-5; Para. [0046]-[0047]), but does not disclose or teach the limitation ” two semi-circular stepped surfaces and in that the cam follower comprises two complimentary engagement surfaces, each respective stepped surface of the cam mechanism mating with a corresponding respective engagement surface of the cam follower .” Claims 2-3 depend, either directly or ultimately, from allowable, independent claim 1 and are, therefore, likewise allowed. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2019/0387676 to Welz et al. and European Pat. Pub. No. 3 178 305 B1 to Reichard relate to mowers having a height adjustment mechanism comprising a manual knob and a cam mechanism with a stepped cam surface . U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2023/0371427 to Lai et al. relates to a lawn mower that has a manual height adjustment knob and a cam mechanism comprising two semicircular helical surfaces. U.S. Pat. No. 5,784, 870 to Seegert et al. and 7,775,025 to Coffin et al. ; and U.S. Pat. Pub. Nos. 2008/0190087 to Elhardt et al. ; 2020/0329637 to Clontz et al. ; and 2021/0045277 to Martin relate to mower deck lift systems with a manual adjustment knob and cam mechanism. Chinese Pat. Pub. Nos. CN 21856753 U to Chen et al. and CN 210580083 U to Wang et al. relate to mowers having a height adjustment mechanism comprising a manual knob, cam or screw and a linkage system to adjust the deck height. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CLAUDE J BROWN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5924 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon-Fri 8AM-5PM . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Joseph M. Rocca can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (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. /CLAUDE J BROWN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671