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 .
Title of Invention
The new title dated 5-18-2026 is accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuelling (USPN 4281505) in view of evidence provided by Alliss (US 2019/0185289).
Regarding claim 1, Fuelling discloses a mower mountable to a travel machine body, comprising: a mower deck (13) open downward; and at least one rotary cutter (trimming head 31) located inside the mower deck and configured to rotate about a vertical axis, and wherein the at least one rotary cutter comprises a string-like member (53) made of a string-like resin member (filament) and a drum member that holds the string-like member in a wound state (Figure 5 shows an example drum with the filament in a wound state).
The filament of Fueling is wound in the drum and is extended outwardly to perform cutting in the same manner claimed as applicant. It is known that cutting lines are sold in spools and also wound within trimmer heads and that cutting lines maintain a curved bias due to being bent in a spooled shape. It appears applicant is claiming an inherent non-structural shape of the cutting line as applicant’s line is wound and feed in the same claimed manner as Fueling’s. The known curved bias of spooled trimmer line is also evidenced by Alliss (¶0015).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the string-like member of Fueling to be wound in a direction so that when it protrudes from the drum to have a curved portion that protrudes downstream in a rotation direction of the at least one rotary cutter in plan view, as an obvious design choice in spool winding direction and as a natural property of a spooled line as evidenced by Allis.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wadzinski (US 2025/0261586) in view of Fuelling (USPN 4281505) as evidenced by Nevels (US 2018/0199507) and Alliss (US 2019/0185289).
Regarding claim 1, Wadzinski discloses a mower mountable to a travel machine body, comprising: a mower deck (200) open downward; and at least one rotary cutter (blades 204) located inside the mower deck (Figure 11) and configured to rotate about a vertical axis.
Wadzinski discloses typical cutting blades and is lacking the use of string-like resin blades wound within a drum member.
Fuelling discloses a mower and teaches the use of a rotary cutter that comprises a string-like member (53) made of a string-like resin member (filament) and a drum member that holds the string-like member in a wound state (Figure 5 shows an example drum with the filament in a wound state).
Replacement of traditional steel lawnmower blades with filament blades is old and well known in the art as evidence by Nevels (teaches the replacement of normal cutting blades on all types of lawnmowers (¶0019) with rotary cutting blades formed as string-like resin members (Figure 1, ¶0020 discloses the use of any suitable known materials to include nylon). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wadzinski by replacing the blades with the filament blades and drums as taught by Fuelling for the purpose of safer mowing over rough terrain and as the swapping of traditional blades with filament type blades is well known in the art as evidenced by Nevels.
The filament of the combination (Fueling) is wound in the drum and is extended outwardly to perform cutting in the same manner claimed as applicant. It is known that cutting lines are sold in spools and also wound within trimmer heads and that cutting lines maintain a curved bias due to being bent in a spooled shape. It appears applicant is claiming an inherent non-structural shape of the cutting line as applicant’s line is wound and feed in the same claimed manner as Fueling’s. The known curved bias of spooled trimmer line is also evidenced by Alliss (¶0015).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the string-like member of Fueling to be wound in a direction so that when it protrudes from the drum to have a curved portion that protrudes downstream in a rotation direction of the at least one rotary cutter in plan view, as an obvious design choice in spool winding direction and as a natural property of a spooled line as evidenced by Allis.
Regarding claim 2, Wadzinski further discloses wherein: the at least one rotary cutter comprises a plurality of rotary cutters spaced apart from each other inside the mower deck (Figure 11 shows three blades ), the mower deck comprises: a top plate (212) covering an upper portion thereof; and a peripheral wall (214) extending down along a peripheral edge of the top plate, and the peripheral wall includes a back peripheral wall located on a back side thereof and having a wavy shape extending along rotation loci of outer edges of the rotary cutters (As shown in figure 11).
Regarding claim 5, Wadzinski discloses work machine (figure 1) comprising: a travel machine body (chasiss 102); a travel device (wheels 106); a mower mounted to the travel machine body, comprising: a mower deck (200) open downward; and at least one rotary cutter (blades 204) located inside the mower deck and configured to rotate about a vertical axis (Figure 11); a travel electric motor configured to drive the travel device; and a work electric motor configured to rotationally drive the at least one rotary cutter (¶0030).
Wadzinski discloses typical cutting blades and is lacking the use of string-like resin blades wound within a drum member.
Fuelling discloses a mower and teaches the use of a rotary cutter that comprises a string-like member (53) made of a string-like resin member (filament) and a drum member that holds the string-like member in a wound state (Figure 5 shows an example drum with the filament in a wound state).
Replacement of traditional steel lawnmower blades with filament blades is old and well known in the art as evidence by Nevels (teaches the replacement of normal cutting blades on all types of lawnmowers (¶0019) with rotary cutting blades formed as string-like resin members (Figure 1, ¶0020 discloses the use of any suitable known materials to include nylon). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wadzinski by replacing the blades with the filament blades and drums as taught by Fuelling for the purpose of safer mowing over rough terrain and as the swapping of traditional blades with filament type blades is well known in the art as evidenced by Nevels.
The filament of the combination (Fueling) is wound in the drum and is extended outwardly to perform cutting in the same manner claimed as applicant. It is known that cutting lines are sold in spools and also wound within trimmer heads and that cutting lines maintain a curved bias due to being bent in a spooled shape. It appears applicant is claiming an inherent non-structural shape of the cutting line as applicant’s line is wound and feed in the same claimed manner as Fueling’s. The known curved bias of spooled trimmer line is also evidenced by Alliss (¶0015).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the string-like member of Fueling to be wound in a direction so that when it protrudes from the drum to have a curved portion that protrudes downstream in a rotation direction of the at least one rotary cutter in plan view, as an obvious design choice in spool winding direction and as a natural property of a spooled line as evidenced by Allis.
Regarding claim 6, Wadzinski further discloses wherein the at least one rotary cutter comprises at least a first cutter blade and a second cutter blade (blades 204), the vertical axis of the first cutter blade is displaced forward the vertical axis of the second cutter blade (Figure 11 shows a first central blade axis is forward), and the travel machine body comprises a travel device (wheels), a travel electric motor configured to drive the travel device, and a work electric motor configured to rotationally drive the at least one rotary cutter (¶0030).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because of the new grounds of rejection. With respect to the arguments pertaining to the shape of the line protruding from the wound spool within the drum member, examiner takes the position that any spooled line would form the same shape. Known trimmer lines are typically sold in spools and also wound within trimmer and mowing heads. The lines due to the spooling form a memory and do not immediately form a straight line when unspooled. Therefore, any spooled line when fed outwardly from the spool will maintain the claimed shape. Applicant appears to be claiming an inherent feature of a natural curve in a spooled line when unspooled due to the lines memory form being bent in a spool.
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