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 § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 9-10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palicki et al. (Pat. No.: 9,903,079; hereinafter Palicki).
Regarding independent claim 1, Palicki discloses a chute rotation control system configured to rotate a chute (14) of a snow thrower, comprising:
a chute rotation motor (26) coupled (as seen in Fig. 4) to the chute (14) via one or more gears (27), wherein the chute rotation motor (26) is configured to alternately rotate the chute clockwise and counterclockwise (See col. 3, lns. 54-61 where it discloses the chute rotates to left and right, which corresponds to the claimed clockwise and counterclockwise directions);
a left chute control configured to receive one or more left user inputs and to generate a left output signal (See cols. 3-4, lns. 64-4 where it discloses “individual push buttons for adjusting the horizontal and vertical angles [of the chute], one or more directional pads, touchpads, sliders, dials, buttons, switches, or other suitable devices”, one of the individual disclosed suitable devices corresponds to the claimed left chute control, further See col. 3, lns. 54-61 where it discloses that if the device is held to the left by the operator, the chute rotates to the left which corresponds to the claimed left user input and the left output signal);
a right chute control configured to receive one or more right user inputs and to generate a right output signal (See cols. 3-4, lns. 64-4 where it discloses “individual push buttons for adjusting the horizontal and vertical angles [of the chute], one or more directional pads, touchpads, sliders, dials, buttons, switches, or other suitable devices”, one of the individual disclosed suitable devices corresponds to the claimed right chute control, further See col. 3, lns. 54-61 where it discloses that if the device is held to the right by the operator, the chute rotates to the right which corresponds to the claimed right user input and the right output signal); and
a motor controller (52) configured to receive the left input signal and the right input signal, to cause the chute rotation motor (26) to rotate the chute counterclockwise in response to the left input, and to cause the chute rotation motor (26) to rotate the chute clockwise in response to the right input signal.
Regarding claim 2, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, and also discloses wherein the left chute control is configured to receive the one or more left user inputs and the right chute control is configured to receive the one or more right user inputs from an operator while hands of the operator are in operating positions on the snow thrower (See cols. 2-3, lns. 65-1 where it discloses “the controls are positioned proximate the handles 32 such that the user may operate the controls while maintaining a grip on the handles 32”).
Regarding claim 4, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, and also discloses, wherein the motor (26) is coupled (at least operably) to the gear train (27) via a worm (25).
Regarding claim 9, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, and also discloses, wherein, in response to the motor controller receiving the left input signal during a first period of time and receiving the right input signal during a second period of time that overlaps with the first period of time, the motor controller is configured to cause the chute rotation motor to rotate the chute counterclockwise in response to the first period of time beginning before the second period of time, and to cause the chute rotation motor to rotate the chute clockwise in response to the second period of time beginning before the first period of time (i.e., if the motor controller receives the left input signal first, the chute will rotate to the left/counterclockwise, and if the motor controller receives the right input signal first, the cute will rotate to the right/clockwise; See col. 3-4, lns. 54-61 where it discloses the left input signal results in the counterclockwise chute rotation, and the right input signal results in the clockwise chute rotation).
Regarding claim 10, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, and also discloses, wherein, in response to the motor controller receiving the left input signal during a first period of time and receiving the right input signal during a second period of time that overlaps with the first period of time, the motor controller is configured to cause the chute rotation motor to rotate the chute to a neutral angular position (i.e., if the motor controller receives the left input signal and the right input signal at around the same time/immediately after the left input signal, the chute will rotate to a neutral position since equal activation of the left and right input signals will cause equal incremental chute rotation in opposite directions resulting in the chute remaining in the neutral position before any left or right input signal was made).
Regarding claim 13, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, and also discloses wherein the chute has a range of rotation approximately 180 degrees (See col. 5, lns. 66-67 where it discloses the range of motion is 210 degrees, i.e., approximately 180 degrees).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palicki et al. (Pat. No.: 9,903,079; hereinafter Palicki).
Regarding claim 3, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, and also discloses the left and right chute controls are configured to be actuated via being pressed by an operator (See cols. 3-4, lns. 64-4 where it discloses “individual push buttons for adjusting the horizontal and vertical angles [of the chute], one or more directional pads, touchpads, sliders, dials, buttons, switches, or other suitable devices”, note that one of the individual disclosed suitable devices corresponds to the claimed left or right chute control as discussed above in claim 1). However, Palicki fails to specifically disclose wherein the pressable left and right chute controls are specifically paddles as claimed. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the pressable button of Palicki to be the paddle as claimed, as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by Palicki.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palicki in view of Walker et al (Pub. No.: 2009/0293321; hereinafter Walker).
Regarding claim 5, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the gear train is coupled to the chute via a ring gear of the chute. Walker discloses a motorized snowblower chute control assembly (20) configured to rotate a chute (12) via chute rotation motor (M) that coupled to the chute (12) via a gear train (gear train depicted in Fig. 2). More specifically, Walker discloses wherein the motor (M) is coupled to the gear train via a worm (26), and the gear train is coupled to the chute (12) via a ring gear (RG) of the chute (12, See para. [0016] for general disclosure of the above elements). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the ring gear of Walker to the chute rotation control system of Palicki, in order to provide “an electrical snowblower chute control system that minimizes the number of separate components to reduce time spent and thus help reduce the cost – of assembling the snowblower chute control mechanism” (See para. [0004]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palicki in view of Rassch et al (Pub. No.: 2014/0013633; hereinafter Raasch).
Regarding claim 6, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 6, but fails to disclose wherein the left chute control is configured to generate the left output signal by closing a left switch in response to the one or more left user inputs, and wherein the right chute control is configured to generate the right output signal by closing a right switch in response to the one or more right user inputs.
Raasch discloses a similar snow thrower chute control system wherein the chute is rotated in a user-selected direction (See para. [0027]), the control system comprising: a left chute control configured to receive one or more left user inputs and to generate a left output signal and a right chute control configured to receive one or more right user inputs and to generate a right output signal (See Fig. 6 where it discloses if either chute direction control switch is closed, the chute is rotated in the corresponding direction until the chute direction control switch opens, See para. [0035] for corresponding disclosure of the figure; note that the chute rotating in a left or right direction corresponds to the claimed left and right output signals; further See element 120 depicted in Fig. 2 with left and right controls that correspond to the claimed left and right cute control).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the control system of Palicki, to include the left and right switch of Raasch, so that the chute is not rotated beyond its rotatable range (as disclosed para. [0035]).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palicki in view of Rowe et al. (Pub. No.: 2011/0094129; hereinafter Rowe).
Regarding claim 11, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the motor is configured to rotate the chute with a torque between 25 lb-ft and 75 lb-ft. Rowe discloses a rotatable discharge chute (122) of a snow-thrower utilizing a chute motor (170) and an operator control (130) to select and engage the desired, direction, speed, chute orientation etc. More specifically, Rowe teaches that the motor is “capable of producing up to approximately six foot-pounds of torque” (See para. [0034]). Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select the motor that provides the desired/necessary torque range, as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by Rowe, of the combination. Further, Rowe discloses in para. [0034] “one skilled in the art, given the benefit of this disclosure will appreciate the arrangement and construction of suitable drive trains and gear trains, as well as the variety of electric motors that may be incorporated into an electric snow-thrower.”
Regarding claim 12, Palicki discloses the chute rotation control system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the motor is configured to rotate the chute through its range of rotation within 10 seconds or less. Rowe discloses a rotatable discharge chute (122) of a snow-thrower utilizing a chute motor (170) and an operator control (130) to select and engage the desired, direction, speed, chute orientation etc. More specifically, Rowe teaches that the motor is “capable of producing up to approximately six foot-pounds of torque” (See para. [0034]). However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select the motor that provides the desired/necessary power for the desired rotation time, as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by the combination. Further, Rowe discloses in para. [0034] “one skilled in the art, given the benefit of this disclosure will appreciate the arrangement and construction of suitable drive trains and gear trains, as well as the variety of electric motors that may be incorporated into an electric snow-thrower.”
Claims 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palicki et al. (Pat. No.: 9,903,079; hereinafter Palicki) in view of Schmalz (Pub. No.: 2017/0015342).
Regarding independent claim 14, Palicki discloses a snow thrower, comprising:
one or more movement elements (13) configured to move the snow thrower on a surface;
an auger housing (22) and an auger positioned within the auger housing for moving material within the auger housing toward an output of the auger housing (See Fig. 1);
a power system comprising an electric motor (24) that generates mechanical power as an output and receives electrical power as an input (See col. 2, lns. 37-42 where it discloses the motor 24 is a reversible DC motor, i.e., receives electrical power as an input, and drives a connecting mechanism such as a worm gear, i.e., generates power as an output); and
a chute rotation control system configured to rotate the chute (14), comprising:
a chute rotation motor (26) coupled (as seen in Fig. 4) to the chute (14) via one or more gears (27), wherein the chute rotation motor (26) is configured to alternately rotate the chute clockwise and counterclockwise (See col. 3, lns. 54-61 where it discloses the chute rotates to left and right, which corresponds to the claimed clockwise and counterclockwise directions);
a left chute control configured to receive one or more left user inputs and to generate a left output signal (See cols. 3-4, lns. 64-4 where it discloses “individual push buttons for adjusting the horizontal and vertical angles [of the chute], one or more directional pads, touchpads, sliders, dials, buttons, switches, or other suitable devices”, one of the individual disclosed suitable devices corresponds to the claimed left chute control, further See col. 3, lns. 54-61 where it discloses that if the device is held to the left by the operator, the chute rotates to the left which corresponds to the claimed left user input and the left output signal);
a right chute control configured to receive one or more right user inputs and to generate a right output signal (See cols. 3-4, lns. 64-4 where it discloses “individual push buttons for adjusting the horizontal and vertical angles [of the chute], one or more directional pads, touchpads, sliders, dials, buttons, switches, or other suitable devices”, one of the individual disclosed suitable devices corresponds to the claimed right chute control, further See col. 3, lns. 54-61 where it discloses that if the device is held to the right by the operator, the chute rotates to the right which corresponds to the claimed right user input and the right output signal); and
a motor controller (52) configured to receive the left input signal and the right input signal, to cause the chute rotation motor (26) to rotate the chute counterclockwise in response to the left input, and to cause the chute rotation motor (26) to rotate the chute clockwise in response to the right input signal.
Palicki fails to disclose the snow thrower comprising an impeller housing coupled to the auger housing and having an intake through which the material is received at the impeller housing from the output of the auger housing; an impeller configured to receive the material at the intake of the impeller housing and expel the material from the impeller housing by way of a chute coupled to the impeller housing. Schmalz discloses a similar snow thrower comprising: an auger housing (40), an auger (42), an impeller housing (46) coupled to the auger housing (40) and having an intake through which the material is received at the impeller housing (42) from the output of the auger housing (40) and an impeller (48) configured to receive the material at the intake of the impeller housing (46) and expel the material from the impeller housing (42) by way of a chute (50) coupled to the impeller housing (46, See para. [0040]-[0043] for a general disclosure of the above elements)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the snow thrower of Palicki, to include the impeller and impeller housing as disclosed by Schmalz, with a reasonable expectation of success, as such a modification of providing a snow thrower with both an impeller and auger is well within the skill of one having ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 15, the above combination, discloses the snow thrower of claim 14. Palicki, of the combination, also discloses wherein the motor controller (52) is configured to control the electric motor (24) in response to one or more additional user inputs (See col. 2, lns. 37-38 where it discloses the ECU controls the two motors 24 and 26, further See col. 4, lns. 29-31 where it discloses the ECU receives user input from the controls and sends control signals to the motors).
Regarding claim 16, the above combination, discloses the snow thrower of claim 14. Palicki, of the combination, also discloses wherein the motor controller (52) is a dedicated controller (i.e., a controller intended for) for the chute rotation motor (26).
Regarding claim 17, the combination discloses the snow thrower of claim 14. Palicki, of the combination, also discloses wherein the left chute control is configured to receive the one or more left user inputs and the right chute control is configured to receive the one or more right user inputs from an operator while hands of the operator are in operating positions on the snow thrower (See cols. 2-3, lns. 65-1 where it discloses “the controls are positioned proximate the handles 32 such that the user may operate the controls while maintaining a grip on the handles 32”).
Regarding claim 18, the combination discloses the snow thrower of claim 14. Palicki, of the combination, also discloses the left and right chute controls are configured to be actuated via being pressed by an operator (See cols. 3-4, lns. 64-4 where it discloses “individual push buttons for adjusting the horizontal and vertical angles [of the chute], one or more directional pads, touchpads, sliders, dials, buttons, switches, or other suitable devices”, note that one of the individual disclosed suitable devices corresponds to the claimed left or right chute control as discussed above in claim 1). However, Palicki fails to specifically disclose wherein the pressable left and right chute controls are specifically paddles as claimed. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the pressable button of the combination to be the paddle as claimed, as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by Palicki.
Regarding claim 19, the combination discloses the snow thrower of claim 14. Palicki, of the combination, also discloses, wherein the motor (26) is coupled (at least operably) to the gear train (27) via a worm (25).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palicki in view of Schmalz and further in view of Walker et al (Pub. No.: 2009/0293321; hereinafter Walker).
Regarding claim 20, the combination discloses the snow thrower of claim 14. However, the combination fails to disclose wherein the gear train is coupled to the chute via a ring gear of the chute. Walker discloses a motorized snowblower chute control assembly (20) configured to rotate a chute (12) via chute rotation motor (M) that coupled to the chute (12) via a gear train (gear train depicted in Fig. 2). More specifically, Walker discloses wherein the motor (M) is coupled to the gear train via a worm (26), and the gear train is coupled to the chute (12) via a ring gear (RG) of the chute (12, See para. [0016] for general disclosure of the above elements). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the ring gear of Walker to the chute rotation control system of the combination, in order to provide “an electrical snowblower chute control system that minimizes the number of separate components to reduce time spent and thus help reduce the cost – of assembling the snowblower chute control mechanism” (See para. [0004]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Landy et al. (Pub. No.: 2021/0095433) discloses a snow thrower with an impeller and auger. Eakins et al. (Pub. No.: 2003/0226738) discloses a directional chute control system for a snow thrower. Peterson (Pat. No.: 6,058,629) discloses a snowblower chute assembly drive utilizing switches. Additional references relevant but not relied upon can be found in the attached 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Audrey L Lusk whose telephone number is (571)272-5132. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 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, Christopher 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
/A.L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3671