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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “404” has been used to designate both sprockets in fig. 4 and cutter bars in fig. 5. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph 0046 reads “Sprockets 404” and paragraph 0049 reads “cutter bars 404.” Reference numeral 404 should only be used to identify one part. Additionally, paragraph 0046 reads “bars 402,” while the cutter bars should be identified with one reference number. Appropriate correction is required.
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 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farley (US 9253945 B2) in view of Shearer (US 20210137006 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Farley discloses a harvesting machine comprising:
a feeder housing (12) having a plurality of feeder conveyance devices (88) at a first end to feed crop material into the harvesting machine and convey the crop material;
a collecting tank (fig. 1, a conventional combine is shown); and
a debris clearing device (40, fig. 3) positioned within the feeder housing to remove debris from an interior surface of the feeder conveyance devices, the debris clearing device having a plow portion (98) configured to convey dislodged debris away from the harvesting machine (col. 4 lines 19-27).
Farley does not disclose a draper belt system. Farley discloses a header cutting assembly (14) that may move a variety of types of plants including grain, cobs, chaff, and straw (col. 3 lines 5-16).
In the same field of endeavor, discloses a combine having a draper belt system (24, 25) and a feeder housing (14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided Farley with a draper belt system in place of a corn header, as disclosed by Shearer, as a way of allowing the combine to be used to harvest grain crops.
Regarding claim 12, Farley, of the resultant combination, discloses the harvesting machine of claim 11, further comprising a sprocket (54) proximate the debris clearing device.
Regarding claim 13, Farley, of the resultant combination, discloses the harvesting machine of claim 11, the conveyance devices comprising adjacent belts (see fig. 2, two sets of adjacent chains/belts 52 are shown).
Regarding claim 14, Farley, of the resultant combination, discloses the harvesting machine of claim 11, the conveyance devices comprising adjacent chains (see fig. 2, two sets of adjacent chains are shown).
Regarding claim 15, Farley, of the resultant combination, discloses the harvesting machine of claim 11, further comprising one or more additional debris clearing devices (col. 4 lines 19-27).
Regarding claim 16, Farley, of the resultant combination, discloses the harvesting machine of claim 13, wherein the debris clearing device (40) is positioned between the adjacent belts (see fig. 2, two sets of adjacent chains/belts 52 are shown, a debris clearing device 40 is positioned between adjacent belts that do not share the same sprocket as 40).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 8-10, 17-20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 11-16 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE RUNCO whose telephone number is (469)295-9123. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 M-F.
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 5712728971. 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.
/M.I.R./ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/TARA SCHIMPF/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights