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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/02/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 6-13, 15-18, 21, 23-33 of U.S. Application No. 18/470715 filed on 01/02/2026 have been examined.
Office Action is in response to the Applicant's amendments and remarks filed01/02/2026. Claims 6, 10-13, 15-17, & 23-26 are presently amended. Claims 1-5, 14, 19-20, & 22 are cancelled and claim 27-33 are newly added. Claims 6-13, 15-18, 21, 23-33 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
In regards to the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant argues that the prior art does not disclose the limitation “rotating the pair of front wheels at different speeds during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower as a function of a steering input from a steering angle sensor associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel, and positioning the at least one steerable rear wheel with the electric steering motor at a steering angle that is different from an angle of at least one other of the plurality of ground engaging wheels during the turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower”. Applicant further argues on page. 11 of the Remarks, “Moreover, claim 12 requires that the steering angle sensor is associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel. In Gust, the mower comprises an electric motor 36 on the frame for each cutting unit and drive motors 18 for the front wheels 6, as shown in Figure 1 of Gust, reproduced and annotated below. Gust at col. 3, 11. 46-50 and col. 4, 11. 20-23. There is no electric steering motor located above the at least one rear steerable wheel in Gust…Carlson discloses a steering wheel position sensor 31 that detects the rotated position of the steering wheel itself Carlson at ,i [0027]. However, a sensor that measures the position of the steering wheel 26 (that the operator places their hands on to operate the mower) is not the same as a steering angle sensor associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel….Koike includes no disclosure of a steering angle sensor associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel.”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims are interpreted under their broadest reasonable interpretation. The prior art Koike is incorporated to teach the idea of a lawnmower with a steering angle sensor associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel. Koike discloses in Fig. 4, showing a steering angle sensor 80a & 80b being positioned above the electric motors 21 & 22 that rotate the pair of front wheels during turns based on a turn from the rear wheels (see at least Koike, para. [0097] & [0198]). Further Koike teaches calculating a turn amount for each right and left rear wheel using the electric motors 21 & 22, which can be different based on the maneuvering lever for each side to depict an operation amount. This teaches that at least one rear wheel is different from the other wheels based on each separate operating lever (see at least Koike, para. [0113]). In view of the arguments above, the 103 rejection is maintained.
Applicant also argues that the prior art does not disclose the limitation “a plurality of ground engaging wheels comprising a pair of front wheels and comprising at least one rear wheel rotatably journaled to a rear wheel support pivotally mounted to the frame, wherein each of the pair of front wheels and the at least one rear wheel is separately driven by an electric drive motor, wherein the at least one rear wheel is steerable via an electric steering motor operatively connected to and positioned above at least a portion of the rear wheel support;”. Applicant further argues on page. 15-16 of the Remarks, “ Drake also does not teach that the rear wheel is rotatably journaled to a rear wheel support that is pivotally mounted to the frame with an electric steering motor operatively connected to and positioned above at least a portion of the rear wheel support….Gust explicitly discloses that the steering wheel is linked to the rear wheel yoke through conventional mechanical or hydraulic steering linkage, not through an electric steering motor operatively connected to and positioned above at least a portion of a pivotally mounted rear wheel support. Gust at col. 3, 11. 39-45. Gust also does not disclose that the rear wheel itself is separately driven by an electric drive motor. Instead, Gust's rear wheel appears to be a steerable caster or yoke-mounted wheel that receives steering input by virtue of rotating the steering wheel 14 but is not independently powered by its own electric drive motor…Shida also cannot remedy the deficiencies of Drake or Gust because Shida also does not teach the positioning of the rear wheel support or configuration of the mowers. The mower 24 in Shida is not positioned above at least a portion of the rear wheel support.”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. Gust is incorporated to teach the idea of rotating a pair of front wheels of a lawnmowers at different speeds while the mower is making turns (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 40-49). Gust further teaches a motor controller receiving an input from the steering wheel to indicate the turn and adjust speed of the wheels. Gust further mentions the steering wheel is linked to a rear wheel that is steerable and when indicating steering, an input is sent to the motor controller indicating the steering. Further Gust teaches that the rear wheel is rotatably journaled to a rear wheel support pivotally mounted “16” to the frame of the vehicle (see at least Gust, col. 3 lines 39-45). Further Koike is incorporated to teach the at least one steerable wheel that contains an electric steering motor positioned above the steerable rear wheel and each front wheel is powered by an electric drive motor (see at least Koike, Fig. 4 & para. [0097]). In view of the arguments above, the 103 rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to the independent claim(s) 6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. A new grounds of rejection is made in view of US 2019/0184823A1 (“Lapp”).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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) 6 & 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0268165A1 (“Hashima”), in view of US 2019/0184823A1 (“Lapp”).
As per claim 6 Hashima discloses
A method of providing and operating a mower (see at least Hashima, para. [0034]: the riding mower 10, which is a riding ground work vehicle on which an engine is not mounted, is an autonomous off-road vehicle suitable for mowing,), which comprises:
(a) providing at least one grass cutting unit (see at least Hashima, para. [0036]: The riding mower 10 includes a mower 32, which is a working implement supported at a middle portion in the longitudinal direction of the main frame 12 on the lower side thereof. The mower includes, inside a mower deck 34, one or more mower blades, not shown, which are mowing rotary tools capable of rotating around a vertical axis.);
(b) arranging the at least one grass cutting unit on a self-propelled frame of the mower (see at least Hashima, para. [0034]: the riding mower 10, which is a riding ground work vehicle on which an engine is not mounted, is an autonomous off-road vehicle suitable for mowing,);
(c) setting plurality of ground speeds at which the self-propelled frame of the mower may be driven, (see at least Hashima, para. [0075]: On the other hand, when switching to the economy mode is performed by the mode switch 76in FIG. 5 mentioned above, and the deck switch 47 is turned on, the drive control unit 66 of the ECU50 changes, i.e. reduces, maximum allowable speed of the target vehicle speed to economic maximum speed, which is lower than when in the nice-mode, set in advance, and controls the rotational speed of each of the drive motors 22 and 24 in such a way that the maximum speed of the vehicle will be at the economic maximum speed, and also, the mower-related control unit 74 controls each deck motor 46 to rotate at the high efficiency constant speed set in advance.); and
wherein the first mode and the second ode are selected from the group consisting of a mowing mode, a transport mode, a reverse ground speed mode, and a desired clip mode (see at least Hashima, para. [0072]: When switching to the nice-mode is performed, the mower-related control unit 74 of the ECU50 sets the mower-related target rotational speed of the deck motor 46 according to the "mowing travelling cooperative relationship" described above, and performs control such that each deck motor46 is driven at the mower-related target rotational speed which has been set. Therefore, when the vehicle speed is below a, each deck motor 46 rotates at constant rotational speed, but when the vehicle speed is at a or higher, the rotational speed of each deck motor 46 is increased according to the increase in the vehicle speed. & para. [0075]: On the other hand, when switching to the economy mode is performed by the mode switch 76in FIG. 5 mentioned above, and the deck switch 47 is turned on, the drive control unit 66 of the ECU50 changes, i.e. reduces, maximum allowable speed of the target vehicle speed to economic maximum speed, which is lower than when in the nice-mode, set in advance, and controls the rotational speed of each of the drive motors 22 and 24 in such a way that the maximum speed of the vehicle will be at the economic maximum speed, and also, the mower-related control unit 74 controls each deck motor 46 to rotate at the high efficiency constant speed set in advance. [Examiner Note: Eco mode is interpreted as a mowing mode and a nice mode is interpreted as a desired clip mode ).
However Hashima does not explicitly disclose
setting a plurality of ground speeds at which the self-propelled frame of the mower may be driven, including:
a first mode having a first mode maximum ground speed and a first mode lowered ground speed; and
a second mode having a second mode maximum ground speed different from the first mode maximum ground speed and having a second mode lowered ground speed different from the first mode lowered ground speed; and
automatically lowering the first mode maximum ground speed to the first mode lowered ground speed during at least one turn of the mower and automatically lowering the second mode maximum ground speed to the second mode lowered ground speed during at least one turn of the mower.
Lapp teaches
setting a plurality of ground speeds at which the self-propelled frame of the mower may be driven, including: a first mode having a first mode maximum ground speed and a first mode lowered ground speed (see at least Lapp, para. [0018]: One or more speed control actuators are provided, each being operatively connected to at least one of the transaxle systems and being movable between a minimum position corresponding to a driving of at least one of the driving wheels and a maximum position corresponding to a driving of the at least one of the driving wheels. The driving is infinitely variable between the and driving through movement of the control actuator between the and maximum positions. para. [0038]: Different driving speed-ranges may be used for different operation modes of the ZT lawnmower 100. For example, the first speed-range can be used when the lawnmower is operating in a grass-cutting; para. [0044]: The two or more speed mechanisms of each of the transaxle systems 220 may provide at least two different speed-ranges for various operation of the ZT 100, a speed-range being lower than a second speed-range. For example, the first speed-range may be used in a grass-cutting operation mode, when blades 127A, 127B, 127C of the cutting deck 116 are spinning while the ZT 100 is moving. The second speed-range may be used in a non-grass-cutting mode, when the blades 127A, 127B, 127C are not spinning while the ZT 100 is moving.); and
a second mode having a second mode maximum ground speed different from the first mode maximum ground speed and having a second mode lowered ground speed different from the first mode lowered ground speed (see at least Lapp, para. [0018]: One or more speed control actuators are provided, each being operatively connected to at least one of the transaxle systems and being movable between a minimum position corresponding to a driving of at least one of the driving wheels and a maximum position corresponding to a driving of the at least one of the driving wheels. The driving is infinitely variable between the and driving through movement of the control actuator between the and maximum positions. para. [0038]: and the speed-range can be used in a non-grass-cutting mode, such as, when the lawnmower is transported to or from a cutting site. The first speed-range is preferably lower than the second speed-range for ensuring more control of the ZT lawnmower in the grass-cutting mode and to acquire better cutting result. para. [0044]: The two or more speed mechanisms of each of the transaxle systems 220 may provide at least two different speed-ranges for various operation of the ZT 100, a speed-range being lower than a second speed-range. For example, the first speed-range may be used in a grass-cutting operation mode, when blades 127A, 127B, 127C of the cutting deck 116 are spinning while the ZT 100 is moving. The second speed-range may be used in a non-grass-cutting mode, when the blades 127A, 127B, 127C are not spinning while the ZT 100 is moving.); and
automatically lowering the first mode maximum ground speed to the first mode lowered ground speed during at least one turn of the mower and automatically lowering the second mode maximum ground speed to the second mode lowered ground speed during at least one turn of the mower (see at least Lapp, para. [0043-0044]: The speed and/or direction differences may be controllable to generate left or right turns of the ZT lawnmower 100, while the swiveling wheels 131A, 131B change orientations to follow a moving direction of the ZT lawnmower 100…The two or more speed mechanisms of each of the transaxle systems 220 may provide at least two different speed-ranges for various operation of the ZT 100, a speed-range being lower than a second speed-range. For example, the first speed-range may be used in a grass-cutting operation mode, when blades 127A, 127B, 127C of the cutting deck 116 are spinning while the ZT 100 is moving. The second speed-range may be used in a non-grass-cutting mode, when the blades 127A, 127B, 127C are not spinning while the ZT 100 is moving.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of setting a plurality of ground speeds at which the self-propelled frame of the mower may be driven, including: a first mode having a first mode maximum ground speed and a first mode lowered ground speed; and a second mode having a second mode maximum ground speed different from the first mode maximum ground speed and having a second mode lowered ground speed different from the first mode lowered ground speed; and automatically lowering the first mode maximum ground speed to the first mode lowered ground speed during at least one turn of the mower and automatically lowering the second mode maximum ground speed to the second mode lowered ground speed during at least one turn of the mower of Lapp, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order for ensuring more control of the ZT lawnmower in the grass-cutting mode and to acquire better cutting result (see at least Lapp, para. [0038]).
As per claim 10 Hashima discloses
wherein either the first mode or the second mode is the mowing mode (see at least Hashima, para. [0064]: As shown in FIG. 5, the mode switch 76 has a knob 88 which can be twisted by fingers, can switch, based on an operation of a user, between the nice-mode (a Nice position in FIG. 5), which is the mowing travelling cooperative mode, and the economy mode (an Eco position in FIG. 5), which is another drive mode, instructs the switching based on an operation of the user, and outputs an instruction signal indicating the instructed mode to the ECU 50 (FIG. 2, etc.).).
As per claim 11 Hashima does not explicitly disclose
wherein the at least one operational mode of the mower comprises a mowing mode and a transport mode.
Lapp teaches
wherein the first mode is the mowing mode and the second mode is the transport mode (see at least Lapp, para. [0038]: For example, the first speed-range can be used when the lawnmower is operating in a grass-cutting ; and the speed-range can be used in a non-grass-cutting mode, such as, when the lawnmower is transported to or from a cutting site.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of wherein the at least one operational mode of the mower comprises a mowing mode and a transport mode of Lapp, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order for ensuring more control of the ZT lawnmower in the grass-cutting mode and to acquire better cutting result (see at least Lapp, para. [0012]).
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashima, in view of Lapp, in view of US 2009/0188226A1 (“Carlson”).
As per claim 7 Hashima does not explicitly disclose
wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) does not take place during all turns of the mower.
Carlson teaches
wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) does not take place during all turns of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]: If the steering angle is beyond a predetermined threshold angle (i.e., a relatively sharp turn is detected), the controller 36 outputs a control signal to the speed limiter 22 to thereby reduce the maximum speed of the mower10. If the controller 36 determines that the steering angle is below a predetermined threshold angle(i.e., the mower 10 is traveling in a generally straight direction), then the controller 36 outputs a control signal to the speed limiter 22 to increase the maximum speed of the mower 10. It will be appreciated that there could be a plurality of threshold angles and a corresponding number of speed limits set by the controller 36.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) does not take place during all turns of the mower of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
As per claim 8 Hashima does not explicitly disclose
wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) takes place only during turns of the mower which exceed a predetermined first angular range of turns.
Carlson teaches
wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) takes place only during turns of the mower which exceed a predetermined first angular range of turns (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]: If the steering angle is beyond a predetermined threshold angle (i.e., a relatively sharp turn is detected), the controller 36 outputs a control signal to the speed limiter 22 to thereby reduce the maximum speed of the mower 10.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) takes place only during turns of the mower which exceed a predetermined first angular range of turns of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
As per claim 9 Hashima does not explicitly disclose
wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) has at least two choices for how aggressively the automatic lowering occurs during turns within a same angular range of turns, and further including the step of choosing one of the two choices for use.
Carlson teaches
wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) has at least two choices for how aggressively the automatic lowering occurs during turns within a same angular range of turns, and further including the step of choosing one of the two choices for use (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]: It will be appreciated that there could be a plurality of threshold angles and a corresponding number of speed limits set by the controller 36. In other embodiments, when turning of the mower 10 is detected the speed limit of the mower 10 is set at five miles per hour (5 mph). Thus, the mower 10 can travel at a higher rate of speed when traveling straight, and the speed limit of the mower 10 is reduced when turning. Accordingly, control of the mower 10 is improved.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of wherein the automatic lowering as set forth in limitation (d) has at least two choices for how aggressively the automatic lowering occurs during turns within a same angular range of turns, and further including the step of choosing one of the two choices for use of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
Claim(s) 12 & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashima, in view of US 2012/0323420A1 (“Koike”).
As per claim 12 Hashima discloses
A method of providing and operating a mower (see at least Hashima, para. [0034]: the riding mower 10, which is a riding ground work vehicle on which an engine is not mounted, is an autonomous off-road vehicle suitable for mowing,), which comprises:
(a) providing at least one grass cutting unit on a self-propelled frame of the mower (see at least Hashima, para. [0034]: the riding mower 10, which is a riding ground work vehicle on which an engine is not mounted, is an autonomous off-road vehicle suitable for mowing, & para. [0036]: The riding mower 10 includes a mower 32, which is a working implement supported at a middle portion in the longitudinal direction of the main frame 12 on the lower side thereof. The mower includes, inside a mower deck 34, one or more mower blades, not shown, which are mowing rotary tools capable of rotating around a vertical axis.);
(b) providing a plurality of ground engaging wheels on the self-propelled frame of the mower, the plurality of ground engaging wheels comprising a pair of front wheels and at least one rear wheel, wherein the at least one rear wheel is steerable (see at least Hashima, para. [0044]: Additionally, the number of the caster wheels 14 and 16 is not limited to two, and one caster wheel may be provided on the riding mower 10, or a plurality of caster wheels, such as three or more, may be provided on the riding mower 10, for example. Additionally, in the present embodiment, the left and right wheels 18 and 20, which are the main driving wheels, are assumed to be the rear wheels, and the caster wheels 14 and 16 are assumed to be the front wheels, but the left and right wheels 18and 20, as the main driving wheels, may be made the front wheels, and the caster wheels 14 and 16may be made the rear wheels.);
(c) setting a maximum ground speed that the self-propelled frame may be driven at in at least one operational mode of the mower (see at least Hashima, para. [0075]: On the other hand, when switching to the economy mode is performed by the mode switch 76in FIG. 5 mentioned above, and the deck switch 47 is turned on, the drive control unit 66 of the ECU50 changes, i.e. reduces, maximum allowable speed of the target vehicle speed to economic maximum speed, which is lower than when in the nice-mode, set in advance, and controls the rotational speed of each of the drive motors 22 and 24 in such a way that the maximum speed of the vehicle will be at the economic maximum speed, and also, the mower-related control unit 74 controls each deck motor 46 to rotate at the high efficiency constant speed set in advance.).
However Hashima does not explicitly disclose
(d) rotating the pair of front wheels at different speeds during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower as a function of a steering input from a steering angle sensor associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel, or
(e) positioning the at least one steerable rear wheel at a steering angle that is different from an angle of at least one other of the plurality of ground engaging wheels during the turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower.
Koike teaches
(d) rotating the pair of front wheels at different speeds during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower as a function of a steering input from a steering angle sensor associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel (see at least Koike, para. [0097]: In case just setting a steering angle to the caster wheel is insufficient for canceling out the tendency of the vehicle turning in the inclinedly downward direction due to the vehicle bank degree being large or the sloping surface being slippery, the present invention further proposes rotatably driving the caster wheel. Namely, a torque for canceling out the tendency of the vehicle turning in the inclinedly downward direction applied to the caster wheel is applied to the caster wheel. In this caster wheel rotation control, as schematically shown in FIG. 2, in this case too, for simplicity of the explanation, it is assumed that the vehicle is to traverse a sloping surface horizontally and the bank degree is the rolling degree of the vehicle, that is, bank angle:0. Then, the relational expression: F for deriving the required caster driving torque: Z is represented as follows. Z=F(.theta.)…This relational expression can be prepared through experiments and learning of the results thereof. This required caster driving torque too can have a different value for each of the right and left caster wheels. Further, instead of effecting the caster wheel rotation drive and the caster wheel steering maneuvering together, the caster wheel rotational drive alone can be effected. & para. [0198]: First, the control unit 5 executes a "target speed calculation process" for obtaining a target speed for each electric motor based on command information from the left/right maneuvering lever 1a,1b (step #201). In this target speed calculation process, operational positions of the maneuvering levers 1a, 1b are read based on the detection values of the left and right steering angle sensors 80a,80b; and based on the detection values of the respective maneuvering angle detection sensors 80a,80b, "operational position corresponding speeds" corresponding to the operational positions are obtained respectively, and then, based on these operational position corresponding speeds, the target speeds for the respective travel drive motors 21, 22 are calculated.); and
(e) positioning the at least one steerable rear wheel with the electric steering motor at a steering angle that is different from an angle of at least one other of the plurality of ground engaging wheels during the turns of the frame of the mower (see at least Koike, para. [0113]:The base control amount is a control amount calculated based on the operational amount of the maneuvering unit 1, on the assumption of flat terrain travel, that is a travel wherein the target rotational speed becomes the actual rotational speed. The base control amount calculation section 50 includes a left wheel speed calculation section 51 and a right wheel speed calculation section 52. The left wheel speed calculation section 51 calculates the rotational speed (number of rotations) of the left rear wheel 2a, i.e. the rotational speed (torque) of the left wheel motor 21, based on an operational amount via the left steering angle detection sensor 80a for detecting an amount of operation of the left maneuvering lever 1a by the driver. By a similar method, the right wheel speed calculation section 52calculates the rotational speed (number of rotations) of the right rear wheel 2b, i.e. the rotational speed (torque) of the right wheel motor 22, based on an operational amount via the right steering angle detection sensor 80b for detecting an amount of operation of the right maneuvering lever 1b by the driver. For these calculations, a table or a function representing the relationship between the operational positions and the rotational speeds is employed.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of (d) rotating the pair of front wheels at different speeds during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower as a function of a steering input from a steering angle sensor associated with an electric steering motor positioned above the at least one steerable rear wheel, and (e) positioning the at least one steerable rear wheel at a steering angle that is different from an angle of at least one other of the plurality of ground engaging wheels during the turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower of Koike, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order for the drive unit and the caster wheel drives section effect the torque control and the speed control easily and speedily (see at least Koike, para. [0025]).
As per claim 15 Hashima does not explicitly disclose
wherein the step of rotating the pair of front wheels includes driving each of the pair of front wheels with a separate electric motor and further comprising the step of rotating the at least one rear wheel with the electric steering motor.
Koike teaches
wherein the step of rotating the pair of front wheels includes driving each of the pair of front wheels with a separate electric motor and further comprising the step of rotating the at least one rear wheel with the electric steering motor (see at least Koike, para. [0086]: this embodiment, the self-propelled vehicle includes a pair of right and left drive wheels (rear wheels) driven by electric motors (which will be referred to simply as "motors" hereinafter) as drive wheel units, and a pair of right and left caster wheels as front wheels that can be changed in the steering angles by the motors. & para. [0100]: Each caster wheel 3a, 3bincludes a drive motor 31a, 31b as an in-wheel motor for rotationally driving the caster wheel and a steering motor 32a, 32b for changing the steering angle. In this case, the drive motors 31a, 31bconstitute a caster wheel drive section.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of wherein the step of rotating the pair of front wheels includes driving each of the pair of front wheels with a separate electric motor and further comprising the step of rotating the at least one rear wheel with the electric steering motor of Koike, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order for the drive unit and the caster wheel drives section effect the torque control and the speed control easily and speedily (see at least Koike, para. [0025]).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashima, in view of Koike, in view of Carlson.
As per claim 13 Hashima does not explicitly disclose
further comprising automatically lowering the maximum ground speed setting during at least one turn of the self-propelled frame of the mower when the mower is operating in the at least one operational mode.
Carlson teaches
further comprising automatically lowering the maximum ground speed setting during at least one turn of the self-propelled frame of the mower when the mower is operating in the at least one operational mode (see at least Carlson, para. [0022] & para. [0040]: In other embodiments, the feedback device 34 automatically changes the speed limit of the mower 10. The steering angle is detected by the steering wheel position sensor 31 and/or the steering angle sensor 33, and a correlative input signal is transmitted to the controller 36. If the steering angle is beyond a predetermined threshold angle (i.e., a relatively sharp turn is detected), the controller 36outputs a control signal to the speed limiter 22 to thereby reduce the maximum speed of the mower10.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of further comprising automatically lowering the maximum ground speed setting during at least one turn of the self-propelled frame of the mower when the mower is operating in the at least one operational mode of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
Claim(s) 16, 18, 23-28, 30-31, & 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0000006A1 (“Drake”), in view of US 7610975B1 (“Gust”), in view of Koike, in view US 2014/0325949A1 (“Shida”).
As per claim 16 Drake discloses
A mower comprising (see at least Drake, para. [0010]: Fig. 1 illustrates a conventional gang mower as 2.):
(a) a plurality of reel cutting units including a center reel cutting unit and at least a pair of laterally offset reel cutting units arranged in a gang configuration on a self-propelled frame of the mower (see at least Drake, para. [0010]: Mower 2 incorporates a plurality of cutting units 4 arranged in a 3-2 gang configuration. Such a configuration includes three laterally spaced front cutting units 4f placed in a front row thereof ahead of the front wheels 6 of mower 2. A pair of laterally spaced rear cutting units 4r ( one of which can be seen in FIG. 1) is placed in a rear row between front wheels 6 and rear wheels 8 of mower 2. Rear cutting units 4r are staggered to cover the gaps between front cutting units 4f to cut an unbroken swath of grass. Other gang configurations (e.g. a 2-3, 4-3, 3-4, 2-1 or 1-2) could be used.),
(b) a power system carried on the self-propelled frame of the mower for rotating the cutting reels to cut grass (see at least Drake, para. [0011-0012]: Cutting units 4 used in this embodiment of mower 2 will be powered by their own separate electric motors 20a or 206 . Since there are five cutting units 4 shown in the embodiment of FIG. 1, there will be five electric motors 20a or 206 for powering such cutting units 4, one motor 20a or 206 for each cutting unit 4.);
(c) a plurality of ground engaging wheels comprising a pair of front wheels and comprising at least one rear wheel (see at least Drake, para. [0010]: A pair of laterally spaced rear cutting units 4r ( one of which can be seen in FIG. 1) is placed in a rear row between front wheels 6 and rear wheels 8 of mower 2.),
However Drake does not explicitly disclose
(c) a plurality of ground engaging wheels comprising a pair of front wheels and comprising at least one rear wheel rotatably journaled to a rear wheel support pivotally mounted to the frame, wherein each of the pair of front wheels and the at least one rear wheel is separately driven by an electric drive motor, wherein the at least one rear wheel is steerable via an electric steering motor operatively connected to and positioned above at least a portion of the rear wheel support;
(d) an electronic controller carried on the self-propelled frame, the electronic controller being configured to:
(i) instruct the pair of front wheels to rotate at different speeds during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower in which a speed of an outside wheel of the pair of wheels during turns is increased and a speed of an inside wheel during turns of the pair of wheels is decreased to maintain a constant centerline ground speed of the frame; and
(ii) instruct the at least one steerable rear wheel to be positioned at a steering angle that is different from an angle of at least one other of the plurality of ground engaging wheels during the turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower.
Gust teaches
(c) a plurality of ground engaging wheels comprising a pair of front wheels and comprising at least one rear wheel rotatably journaled to a rear wheel support pivotally mounted to the frame, (see at least Gust, col. 3 lines 39-45: Steering wheel 14 is preferably linked by any conventional steering linkage or system (e.g. a mechanical or hydraulic steering system) to a yoke 16 which carries rear wheel 6c with yoke 16 being rotatable on frame 4 about a generally vertical axis. Thus, operation of steering wheel 14 rotates rear wheel 6c about the vertical axis of yoke 16 to steer mower 2.); and
(d) an electronic controller carried on the self-propelled frame, the electronic controller being configured to (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 40-49 : This is done in mower 2 through motor controller 50 which varies the wheel speeds of the individual wheel motors 18 in the right proportion during a turn to effect a differential action during a turn…):
(i) instruct the pair of front wheels to rotate at different speeds during turns of the frame of the mower, (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 40-49: While steering wheel 14 is linked to the rear wheel yoke 16 to effect turning or steering of mower 2, it is preferable to vary the relative wheel speeds of the front wheel motors 18 during a turn to effect a differential like action and allow the wheel 6a or 6b on the outside of the turn to rotate faster than the wheel 6a or 6b on the inside of the turn. This is done in mower 2 through motor controller 50 which varies the wheel speeds of the individual wheel motors 18 in the right proportion during a turn to effect a differential action during a turn and thereby prevent skidding of the wheels 6a and 6b and the consequent tearing up or destruction of the turf. Preferably, during a turn, the outside wheel 6 is kept rotating at the same speed as before the turn while the inside wheel 6 is slowed by motor controller 2, thus effectively slowing mower 2 down during a turn, to enhance safety and stability of mower 2.); and
(ii) instruct the at least one steerable rear wheel to be positioned at a steering angle that is different from an angle of at least one other of the plurality of ground engaging wheels during the turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower (see at least Gust, col. 3 lines 39-45: Steering wheel 14 is preferably linked by any conventional steering linkage or system (e.g. a mechanical or hydraulic steering system) to a yoke 16 which carries rear wheel 6c with yoke 16 being rotatable on frame 4 about a generally vertical axis. Thus, operation of steering wheel 14 rotates rear wheel 6c about the vertical axis of yoke 16 to steer mower 2. & col. 5 lines 31-36: The motor controller 50 also receives an input from steering wheel 14, or from some other portion of the steering system, indicating whether or not a turn is being attempted and the degree of the turn. While steering wheel 14 is linked to the rear wheel yoke 16 to effect turning or steering of mower 2,).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the at least one rear wheel is steerable; and (d) an electronic controller carried on the self-propelled frame, the controller being configured to: (i) instruct the pair of front wheels to rotate at different speeds during turns of the frame of the mower in which a speed of an outside wheel of the pair of wheels during turns is increased and a speed of an inside wheel during turns of the pair of wheels is decreased to maintain a constant centerline ground speed of the frame; and (ii) instruct the at least one steerable rear wheel to be positioned at a steering angle that is different from an angle of at least one other of the plurality of ground engaging wheels during the turns of the frame of the mower of Gust, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance safety and stability of the mower (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 48-49).
Koike teaches
wherein each of the pair of front wheels and the at least one rear wheel is separately driven by an electric drive motor, wherein the at least one rear wheel is steerable via an electric steering motor operatively connected to and positioned above at least a portion of the rear wheel support (see at least Koike, Fig. 4 & para. [0097]: In case just setting a steering angle to the caster wheel is insufficient for canceling out the tendency of the vehicle turning in the inclinedly downward direction due to the vehicle bank degree being large or the sloping surface being slippery, the present invention further proposes rotatably driving the caster wheel. Namely, a torque for canceling out the tendency of the vehicle turning in the inclinedly downward direction applied to the caster wheel is applied to the caster wheel. & para. [0103-0104]: In this embodiment, the left rear wheel 2a and the right rear wheel 2b depend respectively on the left wheel motor 21 and the right wheel motor 22 which are constituted as in-wheel motors, as the respective drive sources thereof….To the caster wheel drive motors 31a, 31b and the caster wheel steering motors 32a, 32b, a steering power supply unit 43 and a drive power supply unit 44 constituted of inverters 4 provide electric power independently.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hashima to incorporate the teaching of wherein each of the pair of front wheels and the at least one rear wheel is separately driven by an electric drive motor, wherein the at least one rear wheel is steerable via an electric steering motor operatively connected to and positioned above at least a portion of the rear wheel support of Koike, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order for the drive unit and the caster wheel drives section effect the torque control and the speed control easily and speedily (see at least Koike, para. [0025]).
Shida teaches
in which a speed of an outside wheel of the pair of wheels during turns is increased and a speed of an inside wheel during turns of the pair of wheels is decreased to maintain a constant centerline ground speed of the frame (see at least Shida, para. [0066]: The control device 37 controls the rotational speeds of the electric reels 22 installed on the front reel units 13a and 13.b and the rear reel unit 14 on the basis of detected results of the sensors 34a to 34c. This is intended to realize a high quality of lawnmowing even when the traveling speed of the lawn mowing vehicle 1 automatically varies due to ups and downs of the ground despite the lawnmowing vehicle 1 being driven so as to have a constant traveling speed. para. [0088-0089]: Further, not all the rotational speeds of the electric reels 22 installed on the front reel units 13a and 13b and the rear reel unit 14 are essentially controlled so as to be the same. Thus, the rotational speeds of the electric reels 22 may be individually controlled in response to the traveling speed. For example, when the lawn mowing vehicle travels around a curve, the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the front reel unit 13a may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34a, the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the front reel unit 13b may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34b, and the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the rear reel unit 14 may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34C.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of in which a speed of an outside wheel of the pair of wheels during turns is increased and a speed of an inside wheel during turns of the pair of wheels is decreased to maintain a constant centerline ground speed of the frame of Shida, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a high quality of lawnmowing and can be performed with low power consumption without causing an adverse effect such as withering of the grass (see at least Shida, para. [0035]).
As per claim 18 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the at least one rear wheel comprises a pair of steerable rear wheels
Koike teaches
wherein the at least one rear wheel comprises a pair of steerable rear wheels (see at least Koike, para. [0103]: In this embodiment, the left rear wheel 2a and the right rear wheel 2b depend respectively on the left wheel motor 21 and the right wheel motor 22 which are constituted as in-wheel motors, as the respective drive sources thereof.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the at least one rear wheel comprises a pair of steerable rear wheels of Koike, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order in order for the drive unit and the caster wheel drives section effect the torque control and the speed control easily and speedily (see at least Koike, para. [0025]).
As per claim 23 Drake discloses
wherein each of the plurality of grass cutting units is powered by a separate electric motor (see at least Drake, para. [0015]: The first electric motors 20a that drive the five inch cutting units 4 are physically smaller than the second electric motors 206 that drive the seven inch cutting units 4. The first electric motors 20 a used on the five inch cutting units have a relatively small gear reduction between their rotors and output shafts and are designed to rotate their output shafts in a first speed range of from 700 rpm to 1940 rpm. The second electric motors 206 used on the seven inch cutting units have a larger gear reduction between their rotors and output shaft and are designed to rotate their output shafts in a second lower speed range of from 500 to 1600 rpm.).
As per claim 24 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the power system includes a battery pack that powers the plurality of ground engaging wheels and the plurality of grass cutting units.
Koike teaches
wherein the power system includes a battery pack that powers the plurality of ground engaging wheels and the plurality of grass cutting units (see at least Koike, para. [0103-0104]: In this embodiment, the left rear wheel 2a and the right rear wheel 2b depend respectively on the left wheel motor 21 and the right wheel motor 22 which are constituted as in-wheel motors, as the respective drive sources thereof. As shown by the functional block diagram of FIG. 5, the rotational speed and/or the torque respectively of the left wheel motor 21 and the right wheel motor 22 as the drive unit are/is varied by the electric power supplied independently from a left wheel power supply unit 41 and/or a right wheel power supply unit 42 each of which is constructed as an inverter 4. …To the caster wheel drive motors 31a, 31b and the caster wheel steering motors 32a, 32b, a steering power supply unit 43 and a drive power supply unit 44 constituted of inverters 4 provide electric power independently.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the power system includes a battery pack that powers the plurality of ground engaging wheels and the plurality of grass cutting units of Koike, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order for the drive unit and the caster wheel drives section effect the torque control and the speed control easily and speedily (see at least Koike, para. [0025]).
As per claim 25 Drake disclose
wherein the pair of laterally offset grass cutting units includes at least a first laterally offset grass cutting unit and a second laterally offset grass cutting unit, and wherein the controller is configured to operate the first laterally offset grass cutting unit at a different speed from the second laterally offset grass cutting unit of the frame of the mower (see at least Drake, para. [0017]: As noted earlier, motors 20a and 206 have rotational speed ranges that begin and end at different rpms and that are different in size. Main controller 22 has look up tables for each motor 20a and 20b that splits the speed ranges for each motor into a discrete number of speed settings. For example, taking the 700 rpm to 1940 rpm speed range of motor 20 a used on the five inch cutting units 4 and splitting that range into 9 increments, speed setting 1 will equal 700 rpm and speed setting 9 will equal 1940 rpm. Speed settings 2-8 will be spaced between 700 rpm and 1940 rpm.).
However Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein during turns of the frame of the mower, one of the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units is an innermost grass cutting unit and the other of the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units is an outermost grass cutting unit, and wherein the controller is configured to operate the first laterally offset grass cutting unit at a different speed from the second laterally offset grass cutting unit during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower by increasing a speed of the outermost grass cutting unit and decreasing a speed of the innermost grass cutting unit.
Shida teaches
wherein during turns of the frame of the mower, one of the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units is an innermost grass cutting unit and the other of the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units is an outermost grass cutting unit, and wherein the controller is configured to operate the first laterally offset grass cutting unit at a different speed from the second laterally offset grass cutting unit during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower by increasing a speed of the outermost grass cutting unit and decreasing a speed of the innermost grass cutting unit (see at least Shida, para. [0089]: Further, not all the rotational speeds of the electric reels 22 installed on the front reel units 13a and 13b and the rear reel unit 14 are essentially controlled so as to be the same. Thus, the rotational speeds of the electric reels 22 may be individually controlled in response to the traveling speed. For example, when the lawn mowing vehicle travels around a curve, the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the front reel unit 13a may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34a, the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the front reel unit 13b may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34b, and the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the rear reel unit 14 may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34C.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein during turns of the frame of the mower, one of the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units is an innermost grass cutting unit and the other of the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units is an outermost grass cutting unit, and wherein the controller is configured to operate the first laterally offset grass cutting unit at a different speed from the second laterally offset grass cutting unit during turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower by increasing a speed of the outermost grass cutting unit and decreasing a speed of the innermost grass cutting unit of Shida, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a high quality of lawnmowing and can be performed with low power consumption without causing an adverse effect such as withering of the grass (see at least Shida, para. [0035]).
As per claim 26 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the controller includes a differential speed function utilized to operate the pair of front wheels at different speeds and to operate the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units at different speeds.
Shida teaches
wherein the controller includes a differential speed function utilized to operate the pair of front wheels at different speeds and to operate the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units at different speeds (see at least Shida, para. [0089]: Further, not all the rotational speeds of the electric reels 22 installed on the front reel units 13a and 13b and the rear reel unit 14 are essentially controlled so as to be the same. Thus, the rotational speeds of the electric reels 22 may be individually controlled in response to the traveling speed. For example, when the lawn mowing vehicle travels around a curve, the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the front reel unit 13a may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34a, the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the front reel unit 13b may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34b, and the rotational speed of the electric reel 22 installed on the rear reel unit 14 may be controlled on the basis of the detected result of the sensor 34C.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the controller includes a differential speed function utilized to operate the pair of front wheels at different speeds and to operate the first and second laterally offset grass cutting units at different speeds of Shida, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a high quality of lawnmowing and can be performed with low power consumption without causing an adverse effect such as withering of the grass (see at least Shida, para. [0035]).
As per claim 27 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the rear wheel support includes a single side portion to which a rear steering wheel is rotatably journaled.
Gust teaches
wherein the rear wheel support includes a single side portion to which a rear steering wheel is rotatably journaled (see at least Gust, Fig. 1 “16”, & col. 5 lines 34-39: While steering wheel 14 is linked to the rear wheel yoke 16 to effect turning or steering of mower 2, it is preferable to vary the relative wheel speeds of the front wheel motors 18 during a turn to effect a differential like action and allow the wheel 6a or 6b on the outside of the turn to rotate faster than the wheel 6a or 6b on the inside of the turn.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the rear wheel support has an L-shape of Gust, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance safety and stability of the mower (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 48-49).
As per claim 28 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the single side portion is offset from a longitudinal axis of the self-propelled frame and laterally inset from the pair of front wheels
Gust teaches
wherein the single side portion is offset from a longitudinal axis of the self-propelled frame and laterally inset from the pair of front wheels (see at least Gust, Fig. 1 “16”, & col. 5 lines 34-39: While steering wheel 14 is linked to the rear wheel yoke 16 to effect turning or steering of mower 2, it is preferable to vary the relative wheel speeds of the front wheel motors 18 during a turn to effect a differential like action and allow the wheel 6a or 6b on the outside of the turn to rotate faster than the wheel 6a or 6b on the inside of the turn.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the rear wheel support has an L-shape of Gust, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance safety and stability of the mower (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 48-49).
As per claim 30 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the rear wheel support has an L-shape.
Gust teaches
wherein the rear wheel support has an L-shape (see at least Gust, Fig. 1 “16”, & col. 5 lines 34-39: While steering wheel 14 is linked to the rear wheel yoke 16 to effect turning or steering of mower 2, it is preferable to vary the relative wheel speeds of the front wheel motors 18 during a turn to effect a differential like action and allow the wheel 6a or 6b on the outside of the turn to rotate faster than the wheel 6a or 6b on the inside of the turn.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the rear wheel support has an L-shape of Gust, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance safety and stability of the mower (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 48-49).
As per claim 31 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the at least one rear wheel includes a pair of rear wheels.
Koike teaches
wherein the at least one rear wheel comprises a pair of steerable rear wheels (see at least Koike, para. [0103]: In this embodiment, the left rear wheel 2a and the right rear wheel 2b depend respectively on the left wheel motor 21 and the right wheel motor 22 which are constituted as in-wheel motors, as the respective drive sources thereof.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the at least one rear wheel comprises a pair of steerable rear wheels of Koike, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order in order for the drive unit and the caster wheel drives section effect the torque control and the speed control easily and speedily (see at least Koike, para. [0025]).
As per claim 33 Drake discloses
wherein the grass cutting units each include a cutting reel rotatable about a substantially horizontal axis of rotation and a bed knife co-operable with the cutting reel for cutting grass (see at least Drake, Fig. 1 & para. [0005]: Each reel cutting unit comprises a cutting reel rotatable about a horizontal axis for pushing blades of grass against a cooperating bed knife to sever blades of grass & para. [0011]: As the reel of the reel cutting unit rotates, the blades of the reels push standing blades of grass against a fixed bed knife to shear the grass between the reel and the bed knife. FIG. 1 depicts a gang reel mower according to one embodiment of this invention.).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drake, in view of Gust, in view of Koike, in view of Shida, in view of Hashima, in view of Carlson.
As per claim 17 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the controller is further configured to:
set a maximum ground speed that the self-propelled frame may be driven at in at least one operational mode of the mower; and
automatically lower the maximum ground speed setting during at least one turn of the self-propelled frame of the mower when the mower is operating in the at least one operational mode.
Hashima teaches
wherein the controller is further configured to: set a maximum ground speed that the self-propelled frame may be driven at in at least one operational mode of the mower (see at least Hashima, para. [0075]: On the other hand, when switching to the economy mode is performed by the mode switch 76in FIG. 5 mentioned above, and the deck switch 47 is turned on, the drive control unit 66 of the ECU50 changes, i.e. reduces, maximum allowable speed of the target vehicle speed to economic maximum speed, which is lower than when in the nice-mode, set in advance, and controls the rotational speed of each of the drive motors 22 and 24 in such a way that the maximum speed of the vehicle will be at the economic maximum speed, and also, the mower-related control unit 74 controls each deck motor 46 to rotate at the high efficiency constant speed set in advance.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the controller is further configured to: set a maximum ground speed that the self-propelled frame may be driven at in at least one operational mode of the mower of Hashima, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to achieve power saving, a structure capable of obtaining a desirable after-operation state, with an efficient operation (see at least Hashima, para. [0010]).
Carlson teaches
automatically lower the maximum ground speed setting during at least one turn of the self-propelled frame of the mower when the mower is operating in the at least one operational mode (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]: In other embodiments, the feedback device 34 automatically changes the speed limit of the mower 10. The steering angle is detected by the steering wheel position sensor 31 and/or the steering angle sensor 33, and a correlative input signal is transmitted to the controller 36. If the steering angle is beyond a predetermined threshold angle (i.e., a relatively sharp turn is detected), the controller 36outputs a control signal to the speed limiter 22 to thereby reduce the maximum speed of the mower10.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of automatically lower the maximum ground speed setting during at least some turns of the self-propelled frame of the mower when the mower is operating in the at least one operational mode of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
Claim(s) 21, 29 & 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drake, in view of Gust, in view of Koike, in view of Shida, in view of Carlson.
As per claim 21 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the electronic controller is configured to operate the pair of front wheels at different speeds as a function of the steering input from the steering angle sensor associated with the at least one steerable rear wheel.
Carlson teaches
wherein the electronic controller is configured to operate the pair of front wheels at lower speeds as a function of an input from the steering angle sensor associated with the at least one steerable rear wheel (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]:The steering angle is detected by the steering wheel position sensor 31 and/or the steering angle sensor 33, and a correlative input signal is transmitted to the controller 36. If the steering angle is beyond a predetermined threshold angle (i.e., a relatively sharp turn is detected), the controller 36outputs a control signal to the speed limiter 22 to thereby reduce the maximum speed of the mower10. If the controller 36 determines that the steering angle is below a predetermined threshold angle(i.e., the mower 10 is traveling in a generally straight direction), then the controller 36 outputs a control signal to the speed limiter 22 to increase the maximum speed of the mower 10. It will be appreciated that there could be a plurality of threshold angles and a corresponding number of speed limits set by the controller 36. In other embodiments, when turning of the mower 10 is detected the speed limit of the mower 10 is set at five miles per hour (5 mph). Thus, the mower 10 can travel at a higher rate of speed when traveling straight, and the speed limit of the mower 10 is reduced when turning. Accordingly, control of the mower 10 is improved.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the electronic controller is configured to operate the pair of front wheels at lower speeds as a function of an input from the steering angle sensor associated with the at least one steerable rear wheel of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
Gust teaches
wherein the electronic controller is configured to operate the pair of front wheels at different speeds as a function of an input from the steering input associated with the at least one steerable rear wheel (see at least Gust, col. 3 lines 39-45: Steering wheel 14 is preferably linked by any conventional steering linkage or system (e.g. a mechanical or hydraulic steering system) to a yoke 16 which carries rear wheel 6c with yoke 16 being rotatable on frame 4 about a generally vertical axis. Thus, operation of steering wheel 14 rotates rear wheel 6c about the vertical axis of yoke 16 to steer mower 2. & col. 5 lines 31-36: The motor controller 50 also receives an input from steering wheel 14, or from some other portion of the steering system, indicating whether or not a turn is being attempted and the degree of the turn. While steering wheel 14 is linked to the rear wheel yoke 16 to effect turning or steering of mower 2… col. 5 lines 40-49 : This is done in mower 2 through motor controller 50 which varies the wheel speeds of the individual wheel motors 18 in the right proportion during a turn to effect a differential action during a turn and thereby prevent skidding of the wheels 6a and 6b and the consequent tearing up or destruction of the turf. Preferably, during a turn, the outside wheel 6 is kept rotating at the same speed as before the turn while the inside wheel 6 is slowed by motor controller 2, thus effectively slowing mower 2 down during a turn, to enhance safety and stability of mower 2.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the electronic controller is configured to operate the pair of front wheels at different speeds as a function of a input from the steering input associated with the at least one steerable rear wheel of Gust, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance safety and stability of the mower (see at least Gust, col. 5 lines 48-49).
As per claim 29 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the electric steering motor is arranged to operably rotate a top portion of the rear wheel support.
Carlson teaches
wherein the electric steering motor is arranged to operably rotate a top portion of the rear wheel support (see at least Carlson, Fig. 2 “18” & “46” & para. [0029-0030]: Referring now to FIGS. 2 and 3, steering of the mower 10 will be explained in greater detail. As shown, the rear wheel 18 is rotatably mounted on a fork 38 of the ground traction system 14. A shaft40 is fixed to the fork 38 and extends upward therefrom. A gear 42 is fixed to an end of the shaft 40and is spaced from the fork 38. Also, the fork 38, the shaft 40, and the gear 42 are rotatably mounted to a bracket 44, which is fixed to the frame 12 of the mower 10. Also, the ground traction system 14includes an actuator 46, which is in communication with the controller 36. The actuator 46 can be of any suitable type, and in one embodiment, the actuator 46 is an electric motor.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the electric steering motor is arranged to operably rotate a top portion of the rear wheel support of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
As per claim 32 Drake does not explicitly disclose
wherein the electric steering motor is carried by the frame.
Carlson teaches
wherein the electric steering motor is carried by the frame (see at least Carlson, Fig. 2 “18” & “46” & para. [0029-0030]: Referring now to FIGS. 2 and 3, steering of the mower 10 will be explained in greater detail. As shown, the rear wheel 18 is rotatably mounted on a fork 38 of the ground traction system 14. A shaft40 is fixed to the fork 38 and extends upward therefrom. A gear 42 is fixed to an end of the shaft 40and is spaced from the fork 38. Also, the fork 38, the shaft 40, and the gear 42 are rotatably mounted to a bracket 44, which is fixed to the frame 12 of the mower 10. Also, the ground traction system 14includes an actuator 46, which is in communication with the controller 36. The actuator 46 can be of any suitable type, and in one embodiment, the actuator 46 is an electric motor.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Drake to incorporate the teaching of wherein the electric steering motor is carried by the frame of Carlson, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve control of the mower (see at least Carlson, para. [0040]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5PM 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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668