DETAILED ACTION
The preliminary amendments to the claims, filed 5/4/2026, have been entered.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/4/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 19 and 20 in the reply filed on 5/4/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that many of the limitations found in claims 1-18 are also recited in claim 19-20. This is not found persuasive because claims 19-20 are directed towards a method and do not include the limitations of claims 1 and 10. For example, claim 20 does not include a rear dispensing opening, a feeder house, the central portion situated in front of the feeder house, and an additional cutting unit. Therefore, the method is not applied to the same apparatus. Further, the apparatus can be used to perform a different method, such as conditioning crop.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 4-5 and 13-14 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.
Claims 4, 5, 13, and 14 each recites the harvesting device includes in each case one stripper, or cutter bars operating in a high-cutting mode and reels, in the left-hand and right-hand portions. It cannot be determined what is meant by “in each case”. It is assumed, for purposes of examination, that applicant intended that “in each case” refer to for each left and right hand portions.
It cannot be determined if the cutter bars operating in a high-cutting mode and reels are intended to be in the alternative to the stripper. It is assumed, for purposes of examination, that applicant intended that the cutter bars operating in a high-cutting mode and reels are alternative to a stripper.
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.
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) 1-7 and 10-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honey, et al. US2020/0253124 in view of Werner US4299078.
Regarding claim 1, Honey, et al. teaches a harvesting header (Figure 1) for a combine harvester 50 harvesting crops (such as crop described in ¶0003 and wheat ¶0042) with grains growing in stalks and including a feeder house 51, the harvesting header comprising:
a frame structure 131 which is movable in a forward direction X over a field (the area holding the crop) and to which there is attached a harvesting device 130, which extends over an entire width of the harvesting header (as shown in Figure 1) and which serves for harvesting the grains of the crop (using cutter 133 as described in ¶0031);
a rear dispensing opening 144, wherein a crop flow is fed through the rear dispensing opening 144 to the feeder house 51;
a central portion 155, which is situated in front of the feeder house 51, and a left-hand portion (in front of 135a) and a right-hand portion (in front of 135b) which are each laterally offset in relation to the central portion 155; and
wherein the harvesting header (Figure 1) is configured to feed stalks that enter the central portion 155 to the feeder house 51 along with the grains.
Honey, et al. does not teach an additional cutting unit for processing the stalks that remain on the field after the grains have been harvested by the harvesting device.
However, Honey, et al. does suggest including “The central transfer region 155 of header 130 may be aligned with the intake/input 144 to the further processing apparatus (not shown) of combine harvester 50.” ¶0036.
Werner teaches that it is known in the art to provide further processing apparatus (as part of Figure 1) including an additional cutting unit 1 capable of processing the stalks that remain on the field after the grains have been harvested by the harvesting device (due to the crop conditioning effect for 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Honey, et al.’s header to include Werner’s additional cutter to provide conditioning as a known processing apparatus for crop that remain on the field after the grains have been harvested by providing under-mounted conditioning.
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Werner teaches that the additional cutting unit is assigned only to the left-hand and right-hand portions (Figure 3 shows 1 on each of left and right side portions of 30 (see Figure A below, annotated from Werner Figure 3)
PNG
media_image1.png
542
780
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: annotated Werner Figure 3
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Honey, et al. teaches a cutter (cutter bar 133, in which the cutter bar is described to cut crop and collect and sweep crop towards table 145 as described in ¶0031) being provided in the central portion 155 for the purposes of cutting off the stalks that stand in the central portion 155.
Regarding claim 4 and 13, Honey, et al. teaches that the harvesting device 130 includes in each case one stripper, or cutter bars (the above described cutter bar 133) operating in a high-cutting mode and reels 135a/b, in the left-hand and right-hand portion (in front of 135b)s.
Regarding claim 5 and 14, Honey, et al. teaches the harvesting device 130 includes a stripper, or a cutter bar (as recited above) operating in a high-cutting mode and a reel (as recited above), in the central portion 155.
Regarding claim 6 and 15, Honey, et al. teaches that the harvesting device 130 includes, in the left-hand and right-hand portions, in each case one transverse conveyor device 142a/b that feeds the crop to a base 156 arranged in the central region (¶0032 “ transversely oriented conveyors 142a, 142b (sometimes known as “drapers” or “draper conveyors”) associated with table 145 that can transport cut crop material 195 transversely inwards to central region 155 for further processing”), onto which base 156 stalks that are cut off by the cutter in the central portion 155 also pass and from which base 156 the crop can be fed through (via crop flow assistance 160) the dispensing opening to the feeder house 51.
Regarding claim 7 and 16, Werner teaches that the additional cutting unit includes a cutter 3 for cutting off the stalks and including a conveyor rotor 16 which can be operated in a windrowing operating mode in order to convey the cut-off stalks to a discharge hood 12 or to a transverse conveyor belt for the purposes of depositing the stalks in a windrow.
Regarding claim 10, Honey, et al. teaches a combine harvester 50 for harvesting grains of crops, the combine harvester 50 comprising:
a feeder house 51;
a harvesting header (Figure 1), removably attached (wherein the dashed lines show the combine with header attached to the combine 51, thus is considered “removably attached”) to the feeder house 51, the harvesting header (Figure 1) including a harvesting device 130 which extends over an entire width of the harvesting header (Figure 1) and which serves for harvesting the grains of the crop, wherein the harvesting header (Figure 1) includes:
a rear dispensing opening 144, wherein a crop flow is fed through the rear dispensing opening 144 to the feeder house 51;
a central portion 155, which is situated in front of the feeder house 51, and a left-hand portion (in front of 135a) and a right-hand portion (in front of 135b) which are each laterally offset in relation to the central portion 155;
wherein the harvesting header (Figure 1) is configured to feed stalks that enter the central portion 155 to the feeder house 51 along with the grains.
Honey, et al. does not teach an additional cutting unit for processing the stalks that remain on the field after the grains have been harvested by the harvesting device.
Werner teaches that it is known in the art to provide further processing apparatus (as part of Figure 1) including an additional cutting unit 1 capable of processing the stalks that remain on the field after the grains have been harvested by the harvesting device (due to the crop conditioning effect for 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Honey, et al.’s header to include Werner’s additional cutter to provide conditioning as a known processing apparatus for crop that remain on the field after the grains have been harvested by providing under-mounted conditioning.
Claim(s) 8-9 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honey, et al. in view of Werner as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of.
Regarding claim 8 and 17, Honey, et al. in view of Werner teaches the claim, as described above, but does not teach that the discharge hood is configured to be articulated at its front, upper end on the frame structure 131 so as to be pivotable about a pivot axis extending horizontally and transversely with respect to the forward direction X, in order for the discharge hood to be moved into a non-operational position above the harvesting header (Figure 1), in which position the harvesting header (Figure 1) can be dismounted from the feeder house 51 and placed onto a cutting unit transport vehicle and towed behind the combine harvester 50 for the purposes of being transported on a road.
Werner teaches using a hood 12 to direct crop flow around 16.
Klinner teaches that it is known in the art to provide a discharge hood 18 is configured to be articulated at its front (Figure 22 shows dashed lines to show articulation), upper end on the frame structure so as to be pivotable about a pivot axis (above axis of upper part of 110) extending horizontally and transversely with respect to the forward direction (into and out of the page in Figure 22), in order for the discharge hood to be moved into a non-operational position above the harvesting header (such as the raised position, which is considered non-operational for performing the function that it does when in the solid line position), in which position the harvesting header can be (is capable of being) dismounted from the feeder house and placed onto a cutting unit transport vehicle and towed behind the combine harvester for the purposes of being transported on a road (wherein the housing can be disconnected and removed, and is able to be placed on the claimed cutting unit transport vehicle). The change of position is for adapting the position of 18 to varying crop conditions (Column 33: 20-23 “n FIG. 22 there is shown a further modification of the apparatus of FIG. 1(a), illustrating a simple versatile system for adapting the position of the stripping rotor cover 18 to varying crop conditions.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Honey, et al.’s header to include a hood such as in Werner and in Klinner, in which the hood is adjustable as claimed as taught by Klinner, to provide a hood that is adjustable to accommodate varying crop conditions.
Regarding claim 9 and 18, Werner teaches that the conveyor rotor 16, in a chopping operating mode, is movable into a deactivated raised position or drivable in a direction of rotation which is reversed in relation (Column 3: 23-24 “drum 16 described in detail below, the direction of rotation of which can be reversed”) to the windrowing operating mode and in which the conveyor rotor feeds the stalks to a chopping rotor (wherein 17 and 21 and 23 provide chopping) or comminutes the stalks in interaction with counterpart blades 21
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Dunn US2004/0148919 teaches a harvesting head 12 with left 20 and right sides 19 on either side of a central area 24.
Robert, et al. US2013/0160414 teaches a harvesting head 10 with an additional cutter 14.
Stephenson, et al. US2017/0006773 teaches in Figure 2 a harvesting head 64 with frame 30; cutter bar 34; rotary cutters 42a-b.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Cathleen Hutchins whose telephone number is (571)270-3651. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11am-9:30PM EST.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571)272-5405. 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.
/CATHLEEN R HUTCHINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672 6/1/2026
Prosecution Insights