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 .
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) 1-3, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H0636647 Y2 in view of Roths 3,719,158.
Independent Claim 1: JP ‘647 discloses a planting device for placing planting material (P) in the ground, comprising:
a frame (2) movable in a direction of travel,
feeders (B, 8) for delivering the planting material to be planted, and,
fitted to the frame, rotatable planters (A) provided for gripping the supplied planting material and bringing it into the ground,
wherein the feeders comprise first (8) and second (B) feeders that extend, respectively, in a horizontal plane (see 8 in Figs. 1-2) and towards the ground (see B Figs. 1-2), wherein the second feeders are configured to transport the planting material supplied by the first feeders to the rotatable planters (seen in Figs. 1-2),
wherein the first feeders deliver the planting material to be planted in a first feed direction (see in Fig. 2), as per claim 1.
However, JP ‘647 fails to disclose wherein the first and second feeders are movable relative to each other, for adjusting the planting depth of the planting material,
wherein the position of the first feeders relative to the second feeders is movable horizontally in a direction transverse to the first feed direction, so that the planting depth of the planting material is adjustable while a position of the rotatable planters relative to the ground remains unchanged, as per claim 1.
Roths discloses a similar planting device wherein the first (J) and second (H) feeders are movable relative to each other (as described in col. 4, lns. 52-55, first feeder J is movable relative to second feeder H to attain the desired depth to plant the planting material D in the ground), for adjusting the planting depth of the planting material (D),
wherein the position of the first feeders relative to the second feeders is movable in a direction (the vertical direction) transverse to the first feed direction (the direction of J to the left as seen in Fig. 3), so that the planting depth of the planting material is adjustable, as per claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the adjustable first feeder in a direction transverse to the feed direction as taught by Roths on the planting device of JP ‘647 in order to adjust the depth at which the planting material is planted into the ground.
It can be seen that in the resultant combination that JP ‘647s first feeder (8) will move horizontally in a direction transverse (left and right relative to the page as seen in Fig. 1; into and out of the page as seen in Fig. 2) to the first feed direction (the direction of 8 toward the left of the page as seen in Fig. 2) so that the planting depth of the planting material is adjustable and that the planting depth of the planting material will be adjustable while a position of the rotatable planters (A) relative to the ground remains unchanged (adjustment of JP ‘647s feeder 8 relative to feeder B has no effect on the planters A), as per claim 1.
Dependent Claims 2-3, 5: JP ‘647 further discloses wherein the first feeders (8) comprise at least one first conveyor belt (as seen in Fig. 2), as per claim 2;
wherein the second feeders (B) comprise two clamping bands (14, 14’) extending towards the ground (see Fig. 2), between which the planting material (P) supplied by the first feeders (8) is transported in the direction of the planters (A), as per claim 3.
Regarding claim 5, in the resultant combination, it can be seen that JP ‘647s second feeders (B) comprise two clamping bands (14, 14’), and wherein the movement of the position of JP ‘647’s first feeders (8) relative to the second feeders horizontally in the direction transverse (left and right relative to the page as seen in Fig. 1; into and out of the page as seen in Fig. 2) to the first feed direction (8 moves toward the left, as seen in Fig. 2) changes a position of entry of the planting material (P) between the two clamping bands, as per claim 5.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H0636647 Y2 in view of Roths as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nambu 4,597,343.
Dependent Claim 4: The planting device is disclosed as applied above. JP ‘647 further discloses one or more drill coulters (4) for making one or more furrows, and wherein the planting device is configured to bring the planting material (P) into the one or more furrows, as per claim 4.
However, the combination fails to disclose wherein the planting device further comprises one or more pressure rolls or pressure wheels for closing up the one or more furrows again after the planting material has been applied in the one or more furrows, as per claim 4.
Nambu discloses a similar planting device wherein the planting device further comprises one or more pressure rolls or pressure wheels (36) for closing up the one or more furrows (created by 35) again after the planting material (6) has been applied in the one or more furrows, as per claim 4.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the pressure wheels of Nambu on the planting device of JP ‘647 and Roths in order to push soil back into the furrow and press the soil into contact with the planting material.
Response to Arguments
In anticipation of applicant’s argument that Roths discloses a vertical movement of the first feeder relative to the second feeder in the depth adjustment rather than the claimed horizontal movement, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, one of ordinary skill would understand that moving JP ‘647’s first feeder (8) in a vertical direction would either cramp or increase the gap between the first and second feeders (8, B, respectively) and have no effect on the depth of the planting material into the ground. Instead, one of ordinary skill would apply Roth’s teaching to move JP ‘647’s first feeder horizontally, as claimed, in order to obtain the desired planting depth adjustment.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). While Roths teaches a vertical adjustment, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that applying the teaching to the particular arrangement of JP ‘647’s planting device feeders would necessitate a rotation of the direction of adjustment from vertical to horizontal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alicia M. Torres whose telephone number is 571-272-6997. The examiner’s fax number is 571-273-6997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina R. Fulton, can be reached at (571) 272-7376.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the group receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-3600. The fax number for this Group is 571-273-8300.
/Alicia Torres/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 September 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights