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
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The specification is objected to because para. 0041 recites "a second leg 72 (FIG. 6)" twice, but neither second leg 72 nor fasteners 50 are shown in Fig. 6. Appropriate correction is required. The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all such possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is respectfully requested in reviewing the disclosure and correcting any further errors of which Applicant may become aware.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 20 are objected to because each recites "ninety (90) degrees." The recitations of "(90)" should be deleted so as to avoid confusion with reference numerals or characters. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 5 recites "the first end portion of each of the first fastener and the second fastener are respectively positioned in one of the first recess and the second recess..." in lines 1-3, while claim 4 (from which claim 5 depends) recites "the first end portion of each of the first fastener and the second fastener are coupled to the clamp respectively through the first through-hole and the second through-hole" ("the first through-hole and the second through-hole" presumably of the first wall) in lines 1-3. The original disclosure fails to adequately describe the first end portion of each of the first fastener and the second fastener being both "coupled to the clamp respectively through the first through-hole and the second through-hole [of the first wall]" and "respectively positioned in one of the first recess and the second recess" as claimed, such that possession thereof is not conveyed. To the contrary, the specification describes (see Specification, paras. 0041 and 0044) and shows (see Fig. 5) the second leg 72 (as opposed to the first end portion of the first leg) of each of the first fastener 50 and the second fastener 50 being respectively positioned in one of the first recess 102 and the second recess 104. Therefore, claim 5 fails the written description requirement and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). Additionally, claims 6 and 7 are rejected because of their dependency on claim 5.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 are 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 1 recites "a second through-hole;" in lines 10-11. However, claim 1 previously recites "a support plate defining a first through-hole and a second through-hole;" in line 5. It is unclear if these are the same hole or if another hole is being introduced. Thus, the metes and bounds of the claimed "second through-hole" and limitations relative thereto cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 1 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Additionally, claims 2-12 are rejected because of their dependency on claim 1. In light of the specification, claim 1 is being further examined as though "a second through-hole;" reads "the second through-hole;" in lines 10-11.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first through-hole" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since two first through-holes (that of the support plate and that of the first wall) have been defined in the claims.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the second through-hole" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since two second through-holes (that of the support plate and that of the first wall) have been defined in the claims.
In light of the specification, claim 4 is being further examined as though "the first through-hole and the second through-hole" reads "the first through-hole and the second through-hole of the first wall" in lines 2-3.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the first through-hole" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since two first through-holes (that of the support plate and that of the first wall) have been defined in the claims.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the second through-hole" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since two second through-holes (that of the support plate and that of the first wall) have been defined in the claims.
In light of the specification, claim 5 is being further examined as though "the first through-hole and the second through-hole" reads "the first through-hole and the second through-hole of the support plate" in lines 3-4.
Further, claim 5 recites "the first end portion of each of the first fastener and the second fastener are respectively positioned in one of the first recess and the second recess..." in lines 1-3, while claim 4 (from which claim 5 depends) recites "the first end portion of each of the first fastener and the second fastener are coupled to the clamp respectively through the first through-hole and the second through-hole of the first wall" in lines 1-3. It is unclear if or how the first end portion of each of the first fastener and the second fastener are/is both "coupled to the clamp respectively through the first through-hole and the second through-hole [of the first wall]" and "respectively positioned in one of the first recess and the second recess" as claimed, particularly in light of the specification. Thus, the metes and bounds of the limitations in claim 5 cannot be determined. Therefore, claim 5 is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) such that clarification and correction are required. In light of the specification, claim 5 is being further examined as though "the first end portion" reads "the second leg" in line 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 13, 14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peterson et al. (US 4,842,077)
Regarding claim 13, Peterson discloses a method for attaching a ground-engaging tool hanger (including or of 22) to a frame tube (14) of an agricultural tillage implement, the method comprising:
operably coupling (as shown) the frame tube (14) and the ground-engaging tool hanger (including or of 22) together using a clamp (including 32, 60, and bottom wall defining 56 therein), the frame tube positioned on a first side (top side) of a first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein) of the clamp (see Figs. 1 and 4); and
operably coupling (as shown) a scraper assembly (including or of 68) with a support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64) of the clamp, the support flange positioned on a second side (bottom side) of the first wall of the clamp (see Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 14, Peterson discloses the clamp defining a first upstanding tab (36) and a second upstanding tab (38), and wherein the first upstanding tab and the second upstanding tab are positioned on an opposing side (left side in Figs. 1 and 4) of the frame tube (14) from the first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein, extending to the right of 14, such that it is positioned on the right side of 14, in Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 14, Peterson alternatively discloses the clamp defining first and second upstanding tabs (including 72 and 72a, which are relatively small projections as they are thin strips), and wherein the first upstanding tab and the second upstanding tab are positioned on an opposing side of the frame tube (14) from the first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein; see Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 18, Peterson discloses a mounting assembly for an agricultural implement, the mounting assembly comprising:
a clamp including a first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein), a second wall (including 36 and/or 38), and a support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64), the support flange positioned on an opposing side (right side in Figs. 1 and 4) of the first wall from the second wall (which is positioned on the left side in Figs. 1 and 4);
a ground-engaging tool hanger (including or of 22) operably coupled with the second wall of the clamp; and
a scraper assembly (including or of 68) operably coupled with the support flange.
Regarding claim 19, Peterson discloses the support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64) defining a first segment (including 88) that is generally parallel to the first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein; see Figs. 1 and 4) and a second segment (including lower portion of 64) that extends in an offset direction from the first segment (see Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 20, Peterson discloses an offset angle between the first segment (including 88) and the second segment (including lower portion of 64) being less than ninety degrees (see Figs. 1 and 4, wherein said first and second segments form an angle of less than ninety degrees as shown by Applicant).
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kovach (US 9,504,197) in view of Peterson.
Regarding claim 1, Kovach discloses a mounting assembly for an agricultural implement, the mounting assembly comprising:
a clamp including a first wall (44), a second wall (46), and a support flange (extending from 44 about 64 and 66), the support flange positioned on an opposing side of the first wall from the second wall (see Figs. 2 and 5);
a support plate (40) defining a first through-hole (first 42) and a second through-hole (second 42);
a first fastener (first 22) and a second fastener (second 22), each of the first fastener and the second fastener including a first leg (32) with a first end portion (34) and a second leg (36) with a second end portion (38), the first end portion of each of the first fastener and the second fastener being coupled to the clamp and the second leg of each of the first fastener and the second fastener positioned respectively through the first through-hole and the second through-hole (see Figs. 1-4);
a ground-engaging tool hanger (18) positioned between the support plate and the second wall (see Figs. 1-4).
Kovach does not explicitly disclose a scraper assembly coupled with the support flange. Peterson teaches a mounting assembly for an agricultural implement, the mounting assembly comprising:
a clamp including a trailing support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64);
a ground-engaging tool hanger (including or of 22) coupled with the clamp; and
a scraper assembly (including or of 68) coupled with the support flange.
Peterson is analogous because Peterson discloses an agricultural mounting assembly comprising a clamp including a trailing support flange, a ground-engaging tool hanger, and a scraper assembly coupled with the support flange. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the assembly of Kovach with attached scraping means as taught by Peterson for cleaning. (See Peterson, cols. 1-2.) Additionally, providing the assembly of Kovach with the scraping means and further support means therefor as taught by Peterson is a combination of prior art elements (i.e., the mounting assembly of Kovach and the scraping and supporting means of Peterson) according to known methods to yield predictable results (as taught by Peterson). See MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 2, Kovach discloses the first wall (44) defining a first through-hole (first 48) and a second through-hole (second 48).
Regarding claim 3, Kovach discloses the second wall (46) defining a body (including 50), a first upstanding tab (52), and a second upstanding tab (54), and wherein the body and the first upstanding tab form a first recess (56) and the body and the second upstanding tab form a second recess (58).
Regarding claim 4, Kovach discloses the first end portion (34) of each of the first fastener (first 22) and the second fastener (second 22) being coupled to the clamp respectively through the first through-hole (first 48) and the second through-hole (second 48) of the first wall (see Figs. 1-4).
Regarding claim 5, Kovach discloses the second leg (36) of each of the first fastener (first 22) and the second fastener (second 22) being respectively positioned in one of the first recess (56) and the second recess (58) and through one of the first through-hole (first 42) and the second through-hole (second 42) of the support plate (see Figs. 1-4).
Regarding claim 6, Kovach discloses the ground-engaging tool hanger (18) being positioned between the second leg (36) of the first fastener (first 22) and the second leg (36) of the second fastener (second 22; see Figs. 1, 2, and 4).
Regarding claim 7, Kovach discloses a hanger fastener (including 64) configured to be inserted through a hole defined by the ground-engaging tool hanger (18) and a through-hole (including or of 60) defined by the second wall (46) of the clamp (see Figs. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 8, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Peterson teaches the scraper assembly (including or of 68) further comprising a mounting bracket (including upper portion of 64), the mounting bracket defining a mounting hole therethrough (see Figs. 2 and 3, and shown receiving a leg of an L-shaped bolt in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 8, Peterson teaches the mounting bracket (including upper portion of 64) of the scraper assembly being coupled with the support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64) through the insertion of a mounting fastener (L-shaped bolt in 64 shown in Fig. 1) through a void of the support flange (in lower portion of 64) and the mounting hole of the mounting bracket (in upper portion of 64).
Regarding claim 10, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 9, Peterson teaches the scraper assembly further comprising one or more arm members (of 68, extending downwardly from 64 in Fig. 1) operably coupled with the mounting bracket (see Fig. 1), wherein one or more scraper blades (of 68, at the bottom of said arm member in Fig. 1) are operably coupled with each of the one or more arm members (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 1, Peterson teaches the support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64) defining a first segment (including 88) that is generally parallel to a first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein; see Figs. 1 and 4) and a second segment (including lower portion of 64) that extends in an offset direction from the first segment (see Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 12, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 11, Peterson teaches an offset angle between the first segment (including 88) and the second segment (including lower portion of 64) being less than ninety degrees (see Figs. 1 and 4, wherein said first and second segments form an angle of less than ninety degrees as shown by Applicant).
Regarding claim 13, Kovach discloses a method for attaching a ground-engaging tool hanger (18) to a frame tube (16) of an agricultural tillage implement (see claims 8 and 9 of Kovach), the method comprising operably coupling (as shown) the frame tube (16) and the ground-engaging tool hanger (18) together using a clamp (including or of 24), the frame tube positioned on a first side of a first wall (44) of the clamp (see Fig. 2).
Kovach also discloses a support flange (extending from 44 about 64 and 66) positioned on a second side of the first wall (44) of the clamp (see Fig. 2). However, Kovach does not explicitly disclose operably coupling a scraper assembly with a support flange of the clamp. Peterson teaches a method for attaching a ground-engaging tool hanger (including or of 22) to a frame tube (14) of an agricultural tillage implement, the method comprising operably coupling (as shown) a scraper assembly (including or of 68) with a support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64) of a clamp (including 32, 60, and bottom wall defining 56 therein) for coupling the frame tube (14) and the ground-engaging tool hanger (including or of 22), the support flange positioned on a trailing, bottom side of a first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein) of the clamp (see Figs. 1 and 4).
Peterson is analogous because Peterson discloses attaching a ground-engaging tool hanger to a frame tube including coupling a scraper assembly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the method of Kovach with coupling of scraping means as taught by Peterson for cleaning. (See Peterson, cols. 1-2.) Additionally, providing the method of Kovach with coupling of scraping means as taught by Peterson is a combination of prior art elements (i.e., the method for attaching of Kovach and the coupling of scraping means of Peterson) according to known methods to yield predictable results (as taught by Peterson). See MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 14, Kovach discloses the clamp defining a first upstanding tab (52) and a second upstanding tab (54), and wherein the first upstanding tab and the second upstanding tab are positioned on an opposing side of the frame tube (16) from the first wall (44; see Figs. 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 15, Kovach discloses mounting the ground-engaging tool hanger (18) to the clamp (including or of 24) with a hanger fastener (including 64) that is inserted through a hole defined by the ground-engaging tool hanger and a through-hole (including or of 60) defined by a second wall of the clamp (see col. 4, lines 4-30).
Regarding claim 16, Kovach discloses compressively retaining the ground-engaging tool hanger (18) between the clamp (including or of 24) and a support plate (40; see Figs. 1-4).
Regarding claim 17, in view of the modification made in relation to claims 13, 15, and 16, Peterson teaches inserting a mounting fastener (L-shaped bolt in 64 shown in Fig. 1) through a void of the support flange (in lower portion of 64) and a respective hole through a mounting bracket (in upper portion of 64; see Figs. 2 and 3) of the scraper assembly (including or of 68, and further including upper portion of 64).
Regarding claim 18, Kovach discloses a mounting assembly for an agricultural implement, the mounting assembly comprising:
a clamp including a first wall (44), a second wall (46), and a support flange (extending from 44 about 64 and 66), the support flange positioned on an opposing side of the first wall from the second wall (see Figs. 2 and 5); and
a ground-engaging tool hanger (18) operably coupled with the second wall of the clamp (see Figs. 1-4).
Kovach does not explicitly disclose a scraper assembly coupled with the support flange. Peterson teaches a mounting assembly for an agricultural implement, the mounting assembly comprising:
a clamp including a trailing support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64);
a ground-engaging tool hanger (including or of 22) coupled with the clamp; and
a scraper assembly (including or of 68) coupled with the support flange.
Peterson is analogous because Peterson discloses an agricultural mounting assembly comprising a clamp including a trailing support flange, a ground-engaging tool hanger, and a scraper assembly coupled with the support flange. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the assembly of Kovach with attached scraping means as taught by Peterson for cleaning. (See Peterson, cols. 1-2.) Additionally, providing the assembly of Kovach with the scraping means and further support means therefor as taught by Peterson is a combination of prior art elements (i.e., the mounting assembly of Kovach and the scraping and supporting means of Peterson) according to known methods to yield predictable results (as taught by Peterson). See MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 19, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 18, Peterson teaches the support flange (including 88 and lower portion of 64) defining a first segment (including 88) that is generally parallel to the first wall (bottom wall defining 56 therein; see Figs. 1 and 4) and a second segment (including lower portion of 64) that extends in an offset direction from the first segment (see Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 20, in view of the modification made in relation to claim 19, Peterson teaches an offset angle between the first segment (including 88) and the second segment (including lower portion of 64) being less than ninety degrees (see Figs. 1 and 4, wherein said first and second segments form an angle of less than ninety degrees as shown by Applicant).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Lauterbach (US 1,087,790) discloses a mounting assembly comprising a ground-engaging tool hanger (including F and/or F'), a clamp (including C) having a flange (B), and a scraper assembly (including X, Y, and Z) coupled with the flange (see Fig. 1). Kromminga et al. (US 7,631,701) shows similar elements of a mounting assembly in Fig. 5, and Hoffman et al. (US 7,721,815) shows similar elements of a mounting assembly in Figs. 4 and 5.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joel F. Mitchell whose telephone number is (571)272-7689. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6:00.
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at (571)272-0547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JFM/1/9/26
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671