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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 8, 13 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4, line 4 recites “extending towards the”, should read – extends towards the –.
Claim 8, line 4 recites “a contact surface”, should read – the contact surface – from mention of the contact surface in dependent claim 1, line 10.
Claim 13, line 5 recites “from an unfolded position into a folded position”, should read – from the unfolded position into the folded position –.
Claim 15, line 4 recites “from the folded position into an unfolded position”, should read – from the folded position into the unfolded position –.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9, lines 7-9 set forth “moving the discharge chute to a folded position located between the storage position and the harvesting position, wherein in the folded position, the chute extension is moved from a folded position into an unfolded position or from the unfolded position into the folded position.” It is clear here that there are two folding positions – one for the discharge chute and one for the chute extension.
However, claims 10 and 19 recite “the folding position” without specifying which limitation is being folded. Specifically, there are two folding positions claimed and it is unclear which folding position is which in the above mentioned claims; therefore, the claims are rejected for being indefinite.
For the purpose of the examination, the examiner is interpreting the folding position to be the folding position of the discharge chute.
Claim 12, line 2 recites “automatically swiveling the discharge chute”. However, it is unclear how the discharge chute swivels. Specifically, the chute extension swivels from the folded to the unfolded position and vice versa, but the discharge chute pivots up and down between the harvesting, folding, and storage positions; therefore, it is unclear how the discharge chute is swiveling and the claim is rejected for being indefinite.
For the purpose of the examination, the examiner is interpreting this limitation to mean the actuator “automatically pivots the discharge chute”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Behnke et al. (EP 1219159 A1) in view of Bruns (EP 2952084 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Behnke et al. discloses a method (method of operating [3]) operating a discharge chute [3] of a forage harvester [1], the method comprising:
moving the discharge chute between a storage position (see lowered position in Fig. 1) and a harvesting position (see raised position in Fig. 1), the discharge chute comprises a chute connecting piece ([28]; see paragraph [0020], lines 32-34) positioned on the forage harvester so as to be pivotable about a first axis [10] and a chute extension (extension of [3]) positioned on the chute connecting piece; and
moving the discharge chute to a folded position (position between storage and harvesting positions; not shown but inherent in that the chute reaches this position to move between the storage and harvesting positions) located between the storage position and the harvesting position.
But Behnke et al. fails to disclose wherein the chute extension comprises a first section and a second section positioned on the first section so as to be pivotable about a second axis, and the chute extension is moved from a folded position into an unfolded position or from the unfolded position into the folded position.
Bruns discloses a similar forage harvester [1] comprising a discharge chute [10] with a chute extension [11 and 15] positioned on the chute connecting piece ([5], connects the discharge chute the harvester), wherein the chute extension comprises a first section [11] and a second section [15] positioned on the first section so as to be pivotable about a second axis ([A2]; see paragraph [0031], lines 1-4), and the chute extension is moved from a folded position (see position of Fig. 5 in which the second section is folded over the first section) into an unfolded position (see Fig. 1) or from the unfolded position into the folded position (capable of going back-and-forth between the positions due to the actuator [25], see paragraph [0032], lines 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the chute extension of Behnke et al. with the chute extension of Bruns since both are extensions making up the discharge chute, yielding the same predictable result; as well as in order to move the chute into a folded position for transportation (see Bruns paragraph [0047], lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 10, Bruns, of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the second axis [A2] extends in a vertical direction (see Fig. 1 and paragraph [0031], lines 1-4) when in the folded position (see position of Fig. 5 in which the second section is folded over the first section, see paragraph [0031], lines 1-4) (please see the 112(b) rejection above).
Regarding claim 11, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the forage harvester [1] comprises a storage rack [22] for supporting the discharge chute [3] in the storage position (see lowered position in Fig. 1);
wherein the discharge chute is located above the storage rack in the folded position (position between storage and harvesting positions; not shown but inherit the chute reaches this position to move between the storage and harvesting positions); and
wherein the chute connecting piece ([28]; see paragraph [0020], lines 32-34) is aligned essentially parallel to a forward travel direction (see Fig. 1; facing the forward direction of the harvester) of the forage harvester in the folded position (chute connecting piece is parallel to the forward direction when in either the storage or harvesting positions; therefore, is parallel when in the folded position, see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein an actuator [24] is used to trigger an automatic function (actuator automatically swivels the chute, see paragraph [0020], lines 15-17) for automatically swiveling (pivots about axis [10]) the discharge chute [3] (please see the 112(b) rejection above).
Regarding claim 13, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the automatic function (actuator [20] automatically swivels the chute, see paragraph [0020], lines 15-17) comprises automatically moving the discharge chute [3] from the harvesting position (see raised position in Fig. 1) to the storage position (see lowered position in Fig. 1) by:
moving the discharge chute to a position (see harvesting position in Fig. 1) above a storage rack [22];
lowering the discharge chute into the folded position (discharge chute is lowered from the harvesting to the storage position; therefore, lowered into the folded position); and
lowering the discharge chute into the storage position (see storage position in Fig. 1), wherein the discharge chute is positioned on the storage rack (see Fig. 1).
But Behnke et al. fails to explicitly disclose swiveling the chute extension from an unfolded position into a folded position.
However, Bruns discloses swiveling (swivels through actuator [25], see paragraph [0032], lines 1-3) the chute extension [11 and 15] from an unfolded (see Fig. 1) position into a folded position (see position of Fig. 5 in which the second section is folded over the first section).
It can be seen then that when Brun’s chute extension is provided to the discharge chute of Behnke et al. that the automatic function of Behnke et al. is capable of swiveling the chute extension between the unfolded and folded positions for transportation through the actuator of Bruns (see Bruns paragraph [0032], lines 1-3 and [0047], lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 14, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses a discharge flap [9] located at a free end (see end of the second section not connecting the first section in Fig. 1) of the chute extension (see extension of [3]) is moved into a position (pivots through actuator [12], see paragraph [0020], lines 22-23, see storage position of Fig. 1) provided for the storage position (see lowered position in Fig. 1) of the discharge chute [3]; and
wherein after lowering the discharge chute into the storage position, the discharge chute is positioned on the storage rack ([22], see Fig. 1) at an angle (see below) to a direction of forward travel (see below).
PNG
media_image1.png
588
884
media_image1.png
Greyscale
But Behnke et al. fails to disclose the swiveling of the chute extension.
However, Bruns discloses the chute extension [11 and 15] swiveling (swivels through actuator [25], see paragraph [0032], lines 1-3) between a folded (see position of Fig. 5 in which the second section is folded over the first section) and unfolded position (see Fig. 1).
It can be seen then that when the chute extension of Bruns is applied to the discharge chute of Behnke et al. that the discharge flap is capable of being moved into a position for storage at any point of the swiveling of the chute extension due to the discharge flap having its own actuator for movement (see Behnke et al. paragraph [0032], lines 1-3)
Regarding claim 15, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the automatic function (actuator [20] automatically swivels the chute, see paragraph [0020], lines 15-17) comprises automatically moving the discharge chute [3] from the storage position (see lowered position in Fig. 1) to the harvesting position (see raised position in Fig. 1) by:
raising the discharge chute to the folded position (to go from the storage to the harvesting position, discharge chute has to be raised; therefore, meeting the position locating between the storage and harvesting positions); and
raising the discharge chute to the harvesting position (see Fig. 1).
But Behnke et al. fails to explicitly disclose swiveling the chute extension from the folded position into an unfolded position
However, Bruns discloses swiveling (swivels through actuator [25], see paragraph [0032], lines 1-3) the chute extension [11 and 15] from the folded position (see position of Fig. 5 in which the second section is folded over the first section) into an unfolded position (see Fig. 1).
It can be seen then that when Brun’s chute extension is provided to the discharge chute of Behnke et al. that the automatic function of Behnke et al. is capable of swiveling the chute extension between the unfolded and folded positions for transportation through the actuator of Bruns (see Bruns paragraph [0032], lines 1-3 and [0047], lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 16, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses a discharge flap [9] located at a free end (see end of the second section not connecting the first section in Fig. 1) of the chute extension (see extension of [3]) is moved into a position (pivots through actuator [12], see paragraph [0020], lines 22-23, see harvesting position of Fig. 1) provided for the harvesting position (see raised position in Fig. 1) of the discharge chute [3].
But Behnke et al. fails to disclose the swiveling of the chute extension.
However, Bruns discloses the chute extension [11 and 15] swiveling (swivels through actuator [25], see paragraph [0032], lines 1-3) between a folded (see position of Fig. 5 in which the second section is folded over the first section) and unfolded position (see Fig. 1).
It can be seen then that when the chute extension of Bruns is applied to the discharge chute of Behnke et al. that the discharge flap is capable of being moved into a position for storage at any point of the swiveling of the chute extension due to the discharge flap having its own actuator for movement (see Behnke et al. paragraph [0032], lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 17, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the automatic function (actuator [20] automatically swivels the chute, see paragraph [0020], lines 15-17) is actuated by touching (user activates the automatic function through switch [13]; therefore, pushing a button to actuate the actuator, see paragraph [0020], lines 13-17) the actuator [20].
Regarding claim 18, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses triggering (user activates the automatic function through switch [13]; therefore, pushing a button to actuate the actuator, see paragraph [0020], lines 13-17) the actuator [20] via manual input of holding the actuator (holds the switch to activate it; therefore, triggering the actuator), but fails to disclose wherein the actuator further triggers pivoting the chute extension about the second axis.
However, Bruns discloses an automatic function (through control device [40], see paragraph [0040], lines 1-5) for actuating the actuator [25] for pivoting (see paragraph [0032], lines 1-3) the chute extension [11 and 15] about the second axis [A2].
It can be seen then that when Brun’s chute extension is applied to the discharge chute of Behnke et al. that the automatic function of Behnke et al. actuates the actuator of Bruns for pivoting the chute extension about the second axis; therefore, when the multifunction handle of Behnke et al. is triggered, the chute extension is capable of pivoting about the second axis for storage (see Behnke et al. paragraph [0020], lines 3-8).
Regarding claim 19, Behnke et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses an inclination sensor (see paragraph [0020], lines 40-42) that generates data indicative of an inclination of the forage harvester (determines the movement and alignment of the forage harvester, see paragraph [0020], lines 40-42); and
wherein the folded position (position between storage and harvesting positions; not shown but inherit the chute reaches this position to move between the storage and harvesting positions) is determined depending on the inclination of the forage harvester (chute is placed in the folded position when going between the harvesting and storage positions; therefore, would only be moved between positions for road transportation in which there is no incline sensed, see paragraph [0020], lines 35-42 and paragraph [0024], lines 11-14).
Regarding claim 20, Bruns, of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the discharge chute [10] comprises at least a first sensor (pressure sensor; see paragraph [0044], lines 1-2) and a second sensor (travel sensor; see paragraph [0043], lines 1-2) for identifying the position (see paragraph [0042], lines 1-2) of the chute extension [11 and 15];
wherein a control device [40] of the forage harvester [1] identifies the folded position (see Fig. 5) of the chute extension using data generated by the first sensor (see paragraph [0059], lines 1-5); and
wherein the control device of the forage harvester identifies the unfolded position using data generated by the second sensor (travel sensor identifies the path of the piston rod [27] of actuator [25]; therefore, capable of identifying the unfolded and folded positions, see paragraph [0043], lines 1-5).
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 first and second sensors of Bruns on the discharge chute of Behnke et al. in order to detect the travel path of the chute extension as it swivels between the folded and unfolded positions for controlling the supply and discharge of hydraulic fluid to the actuators (see Bruns paragraph [0040], lines 1-5).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892 for the full list of references.
Reference US 0785241 A discloses a similar chute [1] with a folded (see Fig. 2) and unfolded position (see Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNNY WEBB whose telephone number is (571)272-3830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 to 5:30 E.T..
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 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.
/SUNNY D WEBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/JOSEPH M ROCCA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671