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) 13-17 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trudeau (3,453,755).
Regarding claim 13, 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, the nose cavity including a front wall disposed between the front surface and the rear surface of the body
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 disposed between the front surface of the body and the front wall of the nose cavity, the upper scoop extending into the body from the top outer surface towards the bottom outer surface (Figure 1 - unnumbered)
A lower scoop disposed between the front surface of the body and the front wall of the nose cavity, the 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 (column 2 lines 30-31 – bottom and top outer surfaces are symmetrical and Figure 1 shows a rib in the upper surface)
Regarding claim 14, Trudeau 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, the upper scoop front end and the lower scoop front 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 tip end and the rear surface.
Regarding claim 15, Trudeau 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, Trudeau 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, Trudeau discloses that an upper rib outer surface is substantially coplanar with the top outer surface of the wear member (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 21, Trudeau disclose that the widths of the upper rib and the lower rib are smaller than respective widths of the upper scoop and the lower scoop.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 7-12 and 18-20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/22/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Trudeau fails to disclose a “tip portion”, “tip end” and “attachment portion” because the examiner only referred to a figure and not to the elements themselves. When the elements are deemed clearly shown in the Figure, the elements are not always pointed out. As can be seen below, the elements are clearly disclosed by Trudeau.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Tip portion)][AltContent: textbox (attachment portion)][AltContent: textbox (Tip end)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
167
515
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow]
Regarding claim 13, applicant argues that Trudeau fails to disclose the upper and lower scoops disposed between the front surface of the body and the front wall of the nose cavity. The examiner disagrees. Trudeau clearly discloses that the scoops are disclosed between the front wall of the nose cavity and the front surface of the body (See Figure 3). Applicant appears to be arguing that the entire scoop is located between those elements, however this argument is more specific than the current claims. A portion of the scoop lies between the front surface of the body and the front wall of the nose cavity and therefore it meets the claim.
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 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
Prosecution Insights