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 .
Acknowledgment is made of the response filed on 15 December 2025, where:
Claims 1, 11, 16 and 20 have been amended to recite “a walking rolling assembly”; “at least one walking rolling wheel”; “a walking rolling motor”.
Claims 1-20 pending in this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
There is no description in the instant specification describing how the “walking rolling assembly” walks in a manner consistent with the common definition for walking -- placing one element in front of another and then lifting a second element and placing it in front of the front of the first element. See paragraphs 7-10 below for further details.
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 1-20 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.
The “walking rolling assembly” “walking rolling wheel” and “walking rolling motor” (first claimed in Claim 1, lines 4-5; Claim 11, lines 3-4; Claim 16, lines 3-4 and Claim 20, lines 4-5) is not distinct.
The specification identifies the “walking assembly” as element (120—first mentioned paragraph [0035]) and the “walking motor” as element (130—first mentioned paragraph [0035]).
As best understood the walking assembly is a rolling element (element 120 is clearly shown in Figure 1 to be a wheel) and not an element that “walks”. The conventional understanding of the verb “walk” is placing one element in front of another and then lifting a second element and placing it in front of the front of the first element. (See cited patent, U.S. Patent No. 3,850,259 issued to Ikeda et al, for an example of a “walking vehicle”).
The examiner suggests language for lines 4 and 5 of Claim 1 --
a rolling assembly comprising at least one rolling wheel supporting the frame;
a rolling motor configured to drive the at least one rolling wheel to rotate; --
If the Claims are amended to recite a “rolling assembly” then the Specification and any dependent Claims should be amended to positively recite the rolling assembly in place of the walking assembly. Such an amendment would not be considered new matter as the drawings provide support for a rolling assembly.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s remarks state that the claims have been amended “to replace the terms ‘walking assembly’, ‘walking wheel’, and ‘walking motor’ with ‘rolling assembly’, ‘rolling wheel’, and ‘rolling motor’, respectively’ ”.
However, applicant has not struck through the word “walking”. The examiner suggests deleting/striking through the word “walking” in the next response.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The primary reason for the indication of allowable subject matter in this case is the inclusion of: in re claim 1 a lawn mower with first and second energy storage devices,
where the first energy storage device is detachably mounted to the frame of the mower and enabled to supply power to another tool when detached from the mower,
where a driving circuit is electrically connectable with the first energy storage device and the second energy storage device to transfer power from at least one of the first energy storage device or the second energy storage device to at least one of the rolling motor or the driving motor; and
a charging circuit electrically connectable with the first energy storage device and the second energy storage device to charge at least one of the first energy storage device or the second energy storage device;
wherein the riding lawn mower further comprises a first identification terminal engageable with the second energy storage device and a second identification terminal engageable with the first energy storage device and the riding lawn mower identifies a type of the first energy storage device and the second storage device through the first identification terminal and the second identification terminal and selectively connects the first energy storage device and the second energy storage device to the driving circuit and the charging circuit; further in re claim 11 where a ratio of a total energy of the second energy storage device to a total energy of the first energy storage device is greater than or equal to 2 and less than or equal to 20 in re claim 16 where the energy density of the second energy storage unit is different from an energy density of the first energy storage unit; further in re claim 20 where the first energy storage unit has a first positive electrode and the second energy storage unit has a second positive electrode, where the two electrodes are made from different materials; in combination with the other elements recited, not found in the prior art of record.
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 BRIAN L SWENSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5572. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (9-5).
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303) 297-4337. 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.
BRIAN SWENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3618
/BRIAN L SWENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613