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. 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. 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. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations of claim 12 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The drawings only provide illustration of the actuators (10) connected indirectly to the milling drum (8) via pivoting arms (20). 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. 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) 1 , 4 -7, 9- 13 , 16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haehn et al. US 5,893,677 in view of Snoeck et al. US 2012/0301220. Haehn et al. disclose a road planar comprising: A machine frame (1), a plurality of drive wheels (4) having height adjusting cylinders (25) , a pair of pivoting arms (13), a milling drum (8), an engine (9) and a drive belt (10) configured to connect the engine (9) with the milling drum (8). 1 st & 2 nd actuators ( 6 0) configured to raise and lower each side of the milling drum in order to mill the roadway to a desired depth. Col. 6, lns. 28- 45. What Haehn et al. do not disclose is controlling a cross slope of the milling drum. However, Snoeck et al. teach it is known to provide road planars (10) with “A sensor (38) is provided for detecting the relative vertical position of the milling drum (16)” and that a processor (42) receives GNSS data from a receiver (34) , height data from the sensor (38), and cross slope data from an inclinometer (45) and compares the data to design data and controls a hydraulic valve (44) to raise or lower the appropriate cylinder (26, 28), such that the roadway may be dilled at a desired cross slope orientation. See [0022-0025]. Therefore, 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 road planar of Haehn et al. with the milling drum control system taught by Snoeck et al. in order to improve overall quality of the cut. W ith respect to claims 6, 7 Haehn et al. discloses the pivoting arms (13) connect the milling drum (8) to the frame (2) such that the drive belt system and milling drum are pivotable about an axis (3) extending parallel to the drum and the drive shaft of the engine (8). Col. 6, lns. 29-45. With respect to claims 10-1 1 , 16, 17 Haehn et al. disclose the controller is configured to raise and lower the left and right - side actuators (60) . But does not disclose if they are actuated synchronously. However, Haehn et al. does not disclose otherwise either. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the ends of the milling drum (8) would be raised and lowered synchronously in order to prevent uneven pressure milling and uneven wear on the teeth of the milling drum. With respect to claim 12 Haehn et al. disclose the cylinders (60) are connected directly to the pivoting arms (13). See Fig. 1. With respect to claim 13 Haehn et al. disclose a method of milling a roadway comprising the steps of: Driving a road planar to a job site. Activating a milling drum to rotate and lowering by pivoting the milling drum to begin milling a roadway to a desired depth. What Haehn et al. do not disclose is controlling a cross slope of the milling drum. However, Snoeck et al. teach it is known to provide road planars (10) with “A sensor (38) is provided for detecting the relative vertical position of the milling drum (16)” and that a processor (42) receives GNSS data from a receiver (34), height data from the sensor (38), and cross slope data from an inclinometer (45) and compares the data to design data and controls a hydraulic valve (44) to raise or lower the appropriate cylinder (26, 28), such that the roadway may be dilled at a desired cross slope orientation. See [0022-0025]. Therefore, 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 Haehn et al. with the steps of using a milling drum control system taught by Snoeck et al. in order to improve overall quality of the cut. Claim (s) 1 -3 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haehn et al. US 5,893,677 in view of Graham et al. US 2015/0139729 . Haehn et al. disclose a road planar comprising: A machine frame (1), a plurality of drive wheels (4) having height adjusting cylinders (25), a pair of pivoting arms (13), a milling drum (8), an engine (9) and a drive belt (10) configured to connect the engine (9) with the milling drum (8). 1 st & 2 nd actuators (60) configured to raise and lower each side of the milling drum in order to mill the roadway to a desired depth. Col. 6, lns. 28-45. What Haehn et al. do not disclose is controlling a cross slope of the milling drum. However Graham et al. teach a lift cylinder control system comprising: A pair of lift cylinders (130) configured to raise and lower a working tool for roadways. At least one lift cylinder sensor (168) “ to monitor the position of the lift cylinders (130). A crown actuator (142), crown actuator position sensor, slope actuators (150) , height and slope actuator position sensors (149, 150). A controller (160) in communication with the actuators and sensors to receive position data and communicates with the actuators to automatically adjust the position of the working tool to user defined parameters using a graphical user interface (162) . [00 21-0030]. Therefore, 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 road planar of Haehn et al. with the lift cylinder control system taught by Graham et al. in order to provide a feedback control loop to a graphical user interface. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 8 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT RAYMOND W ADDIE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6986 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT m-f 7:30-12:30, then 6-9pm . 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, Chris Sebesta can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you need help from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /RAYMOND W ADDIE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 3/18/2026