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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive due to not having a claim directed to a system for folding and articulating an agricultural head. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Method And Apparatus For Folding And Articulating An Agricultural Head.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 16 is 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.
Claim 16 in line 4 sets forth “locating the wing frame at the first position”. However, it is unclear what the term “locating” entails. Specifically, it is unclear if another limitation is locating the wing frame at the first position or if the limitation sets forth the wing frame being at the first position at this step in the method.
For the purpose of the examination, the examiner is interpreting “locating” to mean pivoting; therefore, line 4 reads “pivoting the wing frame to the first position in response to rotation of the wing frame”.
Claim 16, lines 6-7 recite “releasing the second pivot shaft from the receptacle in response to the wing frame being located at the first position.”. However, is dependent on claim 14, that sets forth in lines 2-4 “in response to articulation of the actuator by the second amount includes pivoting the wing frame about the second pivot shaft by a selected angular amount from a first position to a second position.” It is unclear how the second pivot shaft is released from the receptable at the first position in claim 16 if the first position is a result of the second pivot shaft pivoting the wing frame as set forth by claim 14.
Further, Applicant’s specification paragraph [0042], lines 7-12 recite “Articulation involves rotation of the wing frame 204 about a selected angular range about the pivot axis 236. As explained above, in some implementations, the angular range extends between a location in which the wing frame 204 is a raised orientation (as shown in FIG. 3) and location in which the wing frame 204 is a lowered orientation (as shown in FIG. 4). The actuator 214 is further extendable a second amount, beyond the first amount, to cause the wing frame 204 to rotate about the pivot axis 236 through this angular range.” Likewise, it is unclear how the second pivot shaft is released from the receptable at the first position if the first position is dependent on the second pivot shaft pivoting the wing frame within the receptable; therefore, the claim is rejected for being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter.
For the purpose of the examination, the examiner is interpreting the limitation to read as “pivoting the second pivot shaft within the receptable in response to the wing frame being located at the first position.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by van Vooren et al. (US 9992924 B2).
Regarding claim 1, van Vooren et al. teaches an agricultural head [18] comprising:
a center frame [102];
a wing frame [104] coupled to the center frame;
a first pivot axis (axis of [116]) pivotably connecting the wing frame to the center frame, the first pivot axis configured to facilitate rotation of the wing frame (guides wing frame between configurations through use of the slot [118], see Col. 5, lines 59-67 and Col. 6, lines 1-15) between a folded configuration (see [104] side of Fig. 4) and an unfolded configuration (see Fig. 2) relative to the center frame; and
a second pivot axis (axis of hinge [110]), offset from the first pivot axis (see Fig. 2), pivotably connecting the wing frame and the center frame (see Col. 5, lines 24-31), the second pivot axis configured to facilitate articulation of wing frame (see Fig. 3), in the unfolded position, relative to the center frame.
Regarding claim 2, van Vooren et al. teaches an actuator [120] interconnecting the wing frame [104] and the center frame [102], the actuator configured both to rotate the wing frame relative to the center frame (extends wing frame, allowing for rotation about the first pivot axis through beam [112], see Col. 5, lines 59-67 and Col. 6, lines 1-15) about the first pivot axis (axis of [116]) between the folded configuration (see [104] side of Fig. 4) and the unfolded configuration (see Fig. 2) and to articulate the wing frame (see Fig. 3; actuator changes in length to accommodate floating of the header, see Col. 5, lines 45-52), in the unfolded configuration, relative to the center frame about the second pivot axis (axis of hinge [110]).
Regarding claim 3, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein the actuator [120] is a linear actuator (actuator changes in length to move the wing frame; therefore, is a linear actuator, see Col. 5, lines 45-52).
Regarding claim 4, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein the actuator [120] is a hydraulic linear actuator (uses hydraulic fluid to move the wing frame; therefore, is a hydraulic linear actuator, see Col. 5, lines 45-52).
Regarding claim 5, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein a first end of the actuator [120] is pivotably connected (connected at [122], see Col. 5, lines 17-19) to the center frame [102].
Regarding claim 6, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein a second end of the actuator [120] is pivotably connected (connected at [124], see Col. 5, lines 17-19) to the wing frame [104].
Regarding claim 8, van Vooren et al. teaches a hinge (assembly of pivot shaft and slot) including:
a pivot shaft [116], the pivot shaft defining the first pivot axis (axis of [116]); and
a slot [118], the pivot shaft received into and slidable within the slot (see Col. 5, lines 20-21).
Regarding claim 9, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein the pivot shaft [116] is fixedly connected to one of the wing frame and the center frame ([102]; fixedly connected to center frame through attachment to beam [112]) wherein the slot [118] is fixedly connected to the other of the wing frame ([104; slot is formed within the wing frame) and the center frame.
Regarding claim 10, van Vooren et al. teaches a hinge (assembly of the pivot shaft and receptacle) including:
a pivot shaft (shaft of [110]), the pivot shaft defining the second pivot axis (axis of hinge [110]); and
a receptacle (see below) configured to removably receive the pivot shaft (see Figs. 3-4 and Col. 5, lines 10-13).
PNG
media_image1.png
293
416
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein the pivot shaft (shaft of [110]) is fixedly connected to one of the wing frame ([104]; formed as a part of the wing frame) and the center frame and wherein the receptacle (see above) is fixedly connected to the other of the wing frame and the center frame ([102]; formed as a part of the center frame).
Regarding claim 12, van Vooren et al. teaches a method (method for operating [18]) for operating an agricultural head [18] moveable between a folded configuration (see [104] side of Fig. 4) and an unfolded configuration (see Fig. 2), the agricultural head articulatable in the unfolded configuration (see Fig. 3), the method comprising:
actuating an actuator [120] connected between a wing frame [104] of the agricultural head and a center frame [102] of the agricultural head by a first amount (amount between fully extended and fully retracted positions, see [106] side of Fig. 4 and Fig. 2) in a first direction (retraction to move wing frame inwards for the unfolded configuration, see Col. 5, lines 64-67 and Col. 6, line 1, opposite of lifting configuration);
pivoting the wing frame about a first pivot shaft ([116]; pivot moves to the bottom of the slot, guiding the rotation downwards, see Col. 6, lines 11-18, opposite of lifting configuration) in a first rotational direction (rotating downwards) in response to actuating the actuator in the first direction to move the wing frame from the folded configuration to the unfolded configuration (as wing frame moves inward, first pivot shaft pivots wing frame within the slot to reach the unfolded configuration, see Figs. 2-4);
receiving a second pivot shaft (shaft of [110]) into a receptacle (see below);
actuating the actuator in the first direction by a second amount (extension to allow articulation of the wing frame about the second pivot shaft, see Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 45-52); and
pivoting the wing frame about the second pivot shaft within the receptacle in response to articulation of the actuator by the second amount (see Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 40-52).
PNG
media_image1.png
293
416
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, van Vooren et al. teaches sliding the first pivot shaft ([116]; see Col. 5, lines 54-58) along a slot [118] in response to pivoting of the wing frame [104] about the second pivot shaft (shaft of [110]) within the receptable (see above) in response to articulation of the actuator [120] by the second amount (extension to allow articulation of the wing frame about the second pivot shaft, see Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 45-52).
Regarding claim 14, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein pivoting the wing frame [104] about the second pivot shaft (shaft of [110]) within the receptacle (see above) in response to articulation of the actuator [120] by the second amount (extension to allow articulation of the wing frame about the second pivot shaft, see Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 45-52) includes pivoting the wing frame about the second pivot shaft by a selected angular amount (angular amount between the wing frames [104 and 106] relative to the center frame [102] in Fig. 3) from a first position (see [106] side of Fig. 3) to a second position (see [104] side of Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 15, van Vooren et al. teaches releasably securing (secured within the slot, released to move between positions in the slot according to the position of the wing, see Col. 5, lines 54-58) the first pivot shaft [116] at a location (at the bottom of the slot, see Fig. 3) along the slot [118] in response to the wing frame [104] acquiring the first position (see [106] side of Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 16, van Vooren et al. teaches actuating the actuator [120] in a second direction (outwards to allow floating between the frames, see Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 45-52) to cause rotation of the wing frame [104] about the second pivot shaft (shaft of [110]) in a second rotational direction (rotating upwards), opposite the first rotational direction (rotating downwards);
pivoting the wing frame to the first position (see [106] side of Fig. 3) in response to rotation of the wing frame in the second rotational direction; and
pivoting the second pivot shaft within the receptable (see above) in response to the wing frame being located at the first position (wing frame floats through the second pivot shaft and receptable, see Col. 5, lines 24-31).
Regarding claim 17, van Vooren et al. teaches locking (second shaft and receptable are detachable; therefore, locked together when the wing frame is unfolded or articulated, see Col. 5, lines 10-13 and Figs. 2-4) the second shaft (shaft of [110]) in the receptacle (see above).
Regarding claim 18, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein locking (second shaft and receptable are detachable; therefore, locked together when the wing frame is unfolded or articulated, see Col. 5, lines 10-13 and Figs. 2-4) the second shaft (shaft of [110]) in the receptacle (see above) includes locking the second shaft in the receptacle when the actuator [120] is articulated in the first direction (retraction to move wing frame inwards for the unfolded configuration, see Col. 5, lines 64-67 and Col. 6, line 1, opposite of lifting configuration).
Regarding claim 19, van Vooren et al. teaches in the unfolded configuration (see Fig. 2), actuating the actuator [120] in a second direction (outwards to allow floating between the frames, see Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 45-52);
locking (locked at the top of the slot due to gravity, see Col. 6, lines 11-18) the first pivot shaft [116] at a location along a slot [118] in response to actuating the actuator in the second direction (moving the actuator outwards begins the lifting process, locking the first pivot shaft into place);
pivoting the wing frame about the first pivot shaft in a second rotational direction (rotating upwards), opposite the first rotational direction (rotating downwards), at the location along the slot (see Fig. 4; wing frame is folded, see Col. 6, lines 11-18); and
releasing the second pivot shaft (shaft of [110]) from the receptacle (see above; see Fig. 4) in response to pivoting of the wing frame about the first pivot shaft in the second rotational direction (wing frame is folded in the second rotational direction; therefore, detaching the second pivot shaft from the receptable, see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 20, van Vooren et al. teaches wherein the first amount (amount between fully extended and fully retracted positions, see [106] side of Fig. 4 and Fig. 2) is greater than (first amount is greater due to the full extension and retraction of the frame, while the second amount is to accommodate the floating of the frame; see Figs. 2-4) the second amount (extension to allow articulation of the wing frame about the second pivot shaft, see Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 45-52).
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.
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) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van Vooren et al. (US 9992924 B2) in view of Albinger et al. (EP 1769668 A1).
Regarding claim 7, van Vooren et al. discloses the agricultural head as applied above, as well as, an end of the actuator [120] being pivotably connected to a hinge (connected to pivot [124]), but fails to disclose a linkage extending between the wing frame and the center frame, the linkage comprising a hinge, wherein an end of the actuator is pivotably connected to the hinge of the linkage.
Albinger et al. discloses a similar agricultural head [1] comprising of a linkage [21 and 22] extending between the wing frame [4] and the center frame [3], the linkage comprising a hinge [16], wherein an end of the actuator [12] is pivotably connected (connected at [15]) to the hinge of the linkage.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the hinge of van Vooren et al. with the linkage and hinge of Albinger et al. since both are ways to connect the actuator to the wing frame for rotation between an unfolded and folded configuration; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892 for the full list of references.
Reference US 8468655 B2 discloses a similar agricultural head [10] comprising of a center frame [120], a wing frame [124], a first pivot axis (axis of [146]), and a second pivot axis [128].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNNY WEBB whose telephone number is (571)272-3830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 to 5:30 E.T..
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, Joseph Rocca can be reached at 571-272-8971. 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.
/SUNNY D WEBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/JOSEPH M ROCCA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671