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
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” “The present invention,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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.
Claims 1, 6-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Billstam (WO 9407353 A1) in view of Nicholson (US 1446924 A).
Regarding claim 1, Billstam discloses a landscape rake, comprising:
a rake handle component (2), assembled by a plurality of rods (2b, 2c), wherein
(i) one of the rods at an end portion of the rake handle component has a first fixed portion (see fig. 1 below) and a second fixed portion (5),
(ii) the first fixed portion has a first socket pipe and first hinge assemblies connected to both sides of the first socket pipe,
(iii) each of the first hinge assemblies has a first limiting groove in communication with an interior of the first socket pipe,
(iv) the second fixed portion has second socket pipe and second hinge assemblies connected to both sides of the second socket pipe, and
(v) each of the second hinge assemblies has a second limiting groove (7a) in communication with an interior of the second socket pipe;
a rake body component (3), having at least two rake heads (3a, 3b), wherein
(i) each of the rake heads has one side facing toward the rake handle component and provided with a transverse plate protruding therefrom and is equipped with a plurality of tines, (ii) the transverse plate of each of the rake heads is pivoted at the first limiting groove of the respective first hinge assembly, and (iii) the first limiting groove provides a limiting effect for pivot motion of the transverse plate of the respective rake head within the first limiting groove; and
at least two linkage rod assemblies, each having a first connecting rod (8, 9), wherein (i) each of the first connecting rods is pivoted at the second limiting groove of the respective second hinge assembly, (ii) the second limiting groove provides a limiting effect for pivot motion of the respective first connecting rod within the second limiting groove.
Billstam does not disclose the linkage rod assemblies having a second connecting rod pivotally connected with the first connecting rod, wherein each of the second connecting rods is pivoted at the transverse plate of the respective rake head.
Nicholson discloses a linkage rod assembly having first and second connecting rods (10, 11)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the linkage rod assembly having two rods of Nicholson for the linkage rod assembly having one connecting rod of Billstam. Inasmuch as the references disclose these elements as art recognized equivalents in allowing the relative folding of pivoting members, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the exercise art to substitute one for the other. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 301, 213 USPQ 532, 536 (CCPA 1982).
Regarding claim 6, Billstam, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the tines is equipped with a reinforced portion protruding from a middle portion thereof to enhance strength of the tines (see fig. 1-3, the thickness of the middle portion is greater than that of the end portion of each tine).
Regarding claim 7, Nicholson, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein a pivotal connection mechanism between the first connecting rod (10) and the second connecting rod (11) is configured by a pivot element (12).
Regarding claim 8, Nicholson, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein a fixing element (18, 18) is fastened to a fixing hole (19) between each of the first connecting rods and each of the second connecting rods, preventing folding of the two rake heads during use.
Regarding claim 9, the resultant combination discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein the two rake heads (Billstam: 3a, 3b) are independently pivoted to a respective one of the first hinge assemblies and a respective one of the second connecting rods (Nicholson: 10, 11), allowing individually or simultaneously folding or unfolding of the two rake heads (the incorporation of the linkage assembly having two rods of Nicholson into the rake of Billstam, as established above in claim 1, would allow each rake head to be pivoted individually or simultaneously).
Regarding claim 10, the resultant combination discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein the two rake heads (Billstam: 3a, 3b) are pivotally connected with a respective one of the first hinge assemblies and a respective one of the second connecting rods (Nicholson: 11).
Regarding claim 11, Billstam, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein the two rake heads (3a, 3b) are operated into a folding state (fig. 2) when swinging in a direction towards the rake handle component (2) along with pivot motion of the first connecting rods and the second connecting rods through the first limiting grooves and the second limiting grooves, respectively (see fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 12, Billstam, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein the two rake heads (3a, 3b) are operated into an unfolding state (fig. 1) when swinging in a direction away from the rake handle component (2) along with pivot motion of the first connecting rods and the second connecting rods through the first limiting grooves and the second limiting grooves, respectively (see fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 13, Billstam, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein the tines of the two rake heads are arranged in a uniform spacing configuration (see fig. 1, the tines are uniformly spaced).
Regarding claim 14, Billstam, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein the tines of the two rake heads are arranged in a non-uniform spacing configuration (see fig. 3, the spacing of the two center tines is different than the spacing of the remaining tines).
Regarding claim 15, Billstam, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1, wherein the tines of the two rake heads (3a, 3b) are arranged in a wide spacing configuration (see fig. 1, the tines are spaced from one another).
Regarding claim 16, Billstam, of the resultant combination, discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 11, wherein the tines of the two rake heads (3a, 3b) are arranged in a narrow spacing configuration (see fig. 1, the tines are spaced from one another).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Billstam (WO 9407353 A1) in view of Nicholson (US 1446924 A), and further in view of Mirto (US 4550943 A).
Regarding claim 2, the resultant combination discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1.
The combination does not disclose wherein each of the rods has a corresponding positioning hole which allows a positioning element to be positioned therein or detached therefrom, enabling assembly or disassembly configuration of the rods.
In the same field of endeavor, Mirto discloses rods (40, 42, 44), wherein each of the rods has a corresponding positioning hole which allows a positioning element to be positioned therein or detached therefrom, enabling assembly or disassembly configuration of the rods (col. 2 lines 11-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the handle rods of the resultant combination with corresponding holes and positioning element, as disclosed by Mirto, as an alternative way of assembling and disassembling the handle rods.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Billstam (WO 9407353 A1) in view of Nicholson (US 1446924 A), and further in view of Amundson (US 20110239604 A1).
Regarding claim 3, the resultant combination discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1.
The combination does not disclose wherein the first socket pipe of the first fixed portion is fastened to one end of the rod by inserting a pin into the rod.
Amundson discloses attaching an element (34) to a rod (12) by inserting a pin (40) into the rod (fig. 6, paragraph 0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have attached the pipe socket to the rod of the resultant combination using a pin, as disclosed by Amundson, as one way of attaching a mechanical element to a shaft.
Regarding claim 4, the resultant combination discloses the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1.
The combination does not disclose wherein the second socket pipe of the second fixed portion is fastened to the rod at an appropriate distance from the first fixed portion by inserting a pin into the rod.
Amundson discloses attaching an element (34) to a rod (12) by inserting a pin (40) into the rod (fig. 6, paragraph 0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have attached the pipe socket to the rod of the resultant combination using a pin, as disclosed by Amundson, as one way of attaching a mechanical element to a shaft.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Billstam (WO 9407353 A1) in view of Nicholson (US 1446924 A), and further in view of Petruzelli (US 7661258 B1).
Regarding claim 5, the resultant combination does not disclose the landscape rake as claimed in claim 1.
The combination does not disclose wherein each of the tines has one end formed with a hook portion at a lateral surface thereof facing towards the rake handle component.
In the same field of endeavor, Petruzelli discloses a rake having tines (36) wherein each of the tines has one end formed with a hook portion (42) at a lateral surface thereof facing towards the rake handle component so that raking operations are made biomechanically easier (col. 5 lines 31-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the tines of the resultant combination with a hook portion, as disclosed by Petruzelli, to make raking operations easier for a human operator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 0693986 A discloses a collapsible rake wherein the joints are fixed along the length of the shaft.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE RUNCO whose telephone number is (469)295-9123. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 M-F.
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 Rocca can be reached at 5712728971. 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.
/MADELINE I RUNCO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671