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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trudeau (3,453,755).
Regarding claim 1, Trudeau discloses a wear member comprising:
A body (17) extending from a front surface (E) to a rear surface (22), the body including:
A tip portion extending from a front surface to a tip end
An attachment portion extending from the tip end to the rear surface (Figure 1)
A nose cavity (20,21) extending into the attachment portion from the rear surface towards the front surface
A top outer surface (18)
A bottom outer surface (19), wherein the top outer surface and the bottom outer surface extend from the rear surface and converge towards the front surface (Figure 3)
First and second side outer surfaces extending between the top outer surface ant the bottom outer surface (Unnumbered - Figure 1)
An upper scoop extending into the body from the top outer surface towards the bottom outer surface (Figure 1 - unnumbered)
A lower scoop extending into the body from the bottom outer surface towards the top outer surface (column 2, lines 30-31, bottom outer surface is symmetrical to top outer surface which shows a scoop in Figure 1)
A rib (unnumbered – Figure 1) disposed within at least one of the upper scoop and the lower scoop
Regarding claim 3, should know discloses that the upper scoop extends between an upper scoop front end and an upper scoop rear end, the upper scoop front end is located to the front surface of the check and, an upper scoop rear and is located between the tip and in the rear surface (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 4, Trudeau discloses that the rib includes an upper ring disposed in the upper scoop, the upper rib protruding from the base of the upper scoop towards the top outer surface (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, Trudeau discloses that the upper rib length is smaller than an upper scoop length (figure 4) and an upper rib with is smaller than an upper scoop width (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, Trudeau discloses that an upper rib height (at rear of rib) is smaller than an upper scoop depth (at front of scoop) (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 12, discloses an aperture in each of the first and second side outer surfaces (Figure 1) and an earpad (curved cutout on rear of each side surface) on at least one of the first and second side outer surfaces.
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(s) 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trudeau (3,543,755).
Regarding claims 7-11, discloses the invention as described above including scoop length and width ratios that appear to fall into the claimed ranges. Trudeau fails to specifically disclose the ranges. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the scoop/rib length and width limitations disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 2 and 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trudeau (3,543,755) in view of Renski (9,057,177).
Regarding claims 2, 13 and 18, Trudeau discloses a wear member comprising:
A body (17) extending from a front surface (E) to a rear surface (22), the body including:
A tip portion extending from a front surface to a tip end
An attachment portion extending from the tip end to the rear surface (Figure 1)
A nose cavity (20,21) extending into the attachment portion from the rear surface towards the front surface
A top outer surface (18)
A bottom outer surface (19), wherein the top outer surface and the bottom outer surface extend from the rear surface and converge towards the front surface (Figure 3)
First and second side outer surfaces extending between the top outer surface ant the bottom outer surface (Unnumbered - Figure 1)
An upper scoop extending into the body from the top outer surface towards the bottom outer surface (Figure 1 - unnumbered)
A lower scoop extending into the body from the bottom outer surface towards the top outer surface (column 2, lines 30-31, bottom outer surface is symmetrical to top outer surface which shows a scoop in Figure 1)
A upper rib (unnumbered – Figure 1) located in the upper scoop an extending in the lengthwise direction
A lower rib located in the lower scoop and extending in the lengthwise direction n(column 2 lines 30-31 – bottom and top outer surfaces are symmetrical and Figure 1 shows a rib in the upper surface), wherein the widths of the upper rib and the lower rib are smaller than respective widths of the upper scoop and the lower scoop
While Trudeau discloses the invention as described above, it fails to disclose that the first and second outer side surfaces converge from the tip end toward the front surface. Like Trudeau, Renski also discloses a wear member including a tip with top, bottom and side surfaces wherein at least one of the top and bottom surfaces include a scoop. Unlike Trudeau, Renski discloses that the side surfaces can converge toward the front surface. Renski discloses that the side surfaces can be parallel OR converge (column 12 lines 18-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize tapering side surfaces in Trudeau as taught by Resnki as it would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)).
Further regarding claim 18, Trudeau further discloses a tip assembly including an adapter (1) including a nose and top and bottom legs configured to receive a lip portion of a ground engaging implement (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, the combination discloses the upper scoop extends between an upper scoop front end and an upper scoop rear end, the lower scoop extends between a lower scoop front end and a lower scoop rear end, Dr. Sue front and in the lower scoop from and are both located between the front surface and the tip end, and the upper scoop rear end and the lower scoop around are both located between the top end in the rear surface.
Regarding claim 15, the combination discloses the upper rib protrudes from an upper scoop base towards the top outer surface and the lower rib protrudes from a lower scoop base towards the bottom outer surface.
Regarding claim 16, the combination discloses a height of the upper rib relative to the upper scoop base (at rear of rib) is smaller than a depth of upper scoop base surface relative to the top outer surface (at front of scoop).
Regarding claim 17, combination discloses that an upper rib outer surface is substantially coplanar with the top outer surface of the wear member (Figure 1).
Regarding claims 19-20, discloses the invention as described above including scoop length and width ratios that appear to fall into the claimed ranges. Trudeau fails to specifically disclose the ranges. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the scoop/rib length and width limitations disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lemcke (D251,667) also discloses a wear tooth with a scoop portion with a central rib.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jamie L McGowan whose telephone number is (571)272-5064. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00-5:00 CST.
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, Chris 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