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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on March 15, 2024 and April 8, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification fails to contain the appropriate sub-titles (i.e., “Background of the Invention”, “Brief Description of the Drawing”, etc.).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 4-7, 14 and 20 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.
In claim 4, line 6 and claim 14, line 4, the applicant employs the term “preferably”. The term "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the term are part of the claimed invention.
In claim 20, lines 6-7, it appears that “the arrangement” lacks proper antecedent basis.
In claim 20, line 13, it appears that “the pivot axis” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claims 5-7 are rejected based on their claim dependencies.
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 1-8, 10-14 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Claeys et al. (USPGPub 2022/0000026).
Regarding claim 1: Claeys discloses a cutter device for an agricultural harvester (as seen in figures 1-13), comprising:
a rotor (as seen in figure 2, at 13, also page 3, paragraph [0042]) with a plurality of tines (as seen in figure 2, at 15, also page 3, paragraph [0042]), wherein the rotor is rotatable to transfer an agricultural crop along a feed path,
at least one knife (as seen in figures 4-6, at 18) that is adjustable between (i) a cutting position (as seen in figure 4) in the feed path in which it cooperates with the rotor to cut the crop, and (ii) a non-cutting position (as seen in figure 5) in which it is withdrawn from the feed path, wherein the at least one knife is pivotable about a pivot axis (as seen in figures 4 and 5, as defined through pivot shaft 24) located towards a front part of the knife, and
a positioning device (as seen in figures 4 and 5, at 47) that controls movement of the knife between the cutting position (as seen in figure 4) and the non-cutting position, wherein the positioning device is adjustable between (i) a first position in which it positions the knife in the cutting position (as seen in figure 4), (ii) a second position in which it positions the knife in the non-cutting position (as seen in figure 5), and (iii) a third position in which it is disengaged from the knife to allow movement of the knife independently of the positioning device (as seen in figure 6, via use of lifting mechanism 74 and cam 62; also, page 5, paragraphs [0055] and [0056]), wherein the positioning device is configured to engage the knife and prevent significant movement of the knife independently of the positioning device when the positioning device is in the first position and at intermediate positions between the first position and the second position (as seen between figures 4 and 5, via member 70 applying biased force in area of 47).
Regarding claim 2: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 1. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the pivot axis is defined by a pivot shaft (as seen in figures 4 and 5, at 24), and wherein the pivot shaft and the knife have complementary locking formation that lock the knife to the pivot shaft in a first configuration (as seen in figures 4-6) and allow separation of the knife from the pivot shaft in a second configuration (by rotating the slot at 29 in knife 18 to “flat” 30 in shaft 24); wherein the pivot shaft and the knife are adjustable between the first configuration and the second configuration by relative rotation of the knife and the pivot shaft (page 3, paragraph [0044]).
Regarding claim 3: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 1. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the positioning device is configured to engage the knife at a location towards a rear part of the knife (as seen in figure 4, area of 47).
Regarding claims 4 and 5: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 1. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the positioning device and the knife have complementary engaging formations (as seen in figure 4, “edge” at 26,48 and “roller” 47) configured to maintain engagement between the positioning device and the knife in the first position and all intermediate positions in between the first and the second position (as seen between figures 4 and 5), and to permit disengagement of the positioning device from the knife in the third position at least in the direction of the cutting position (as seen in figure 6, as denoted by “radial” space between members 26 and 47).
Regarding claims 6 and 7: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 4. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the engaging formations comprise a rearwards-facing slot that opens through a rear edge of the knife (as seen in figures 4-6, at 48) and an engaging element (as seen in figures 4-6, at 47) provided on the positioning device that engages the slot and wherein the rearwards-facing slot extends substantially in the direction of the pivot axis of the knife (as seen in figure 4).
Regarding claim 8: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 1. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the positioning device is pivotable about a pivot axis (as seen in figure 4, as defined through shaft 43) of the positioning device, which is located towards a rear end of the positioning device (as seen in figures 4-6).
Regarding claim 10: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 1. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the device includes a control mechanism (as seen in figures 4-6, at 70) that controls movement of the positioning device between the first position and the third position, wherein the control mechanism includes a control element (as seen in figure 6, area of 32,44) that is connected to the positioning device, and an actuator (as seen in figure 3, at 39) that is connected to the control element and is configured to move the control element between a primary position and a secondary position (as seen between figures 4 and 6; also, page 3, paragraph [0045]).
Regarding claim 11: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 10. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the control element is configured for pivoting movement about a pivot axis (as seen in figures 4-6, as defined through 45) of the control element between the primary position (as seen in figure 4) and the secondary position (as seen in figure 5).
Regarding claim 12: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 11. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the pivot axis of the control element (as seen in figure 6, at 45) is offset from the pivot axis of the positioning device (as seen in figure 6, at 43).
Regarding claims 13 and 14: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 10. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the control mechanism includes a resilient connecting element (as seen in figure 6, “coil spring” 40) that is connected to the positioning device (as seen in figure 6, via 32) and configured to enable movement of the positioning device relative to the control element by deformation of the resilient element (as seen between figures 4 and 5) .
Regarding claim 18: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 1. Further, Claeys discloses wherein the cutter device includes a plurality of knives (as seen in figure 3, at 18) and each of the plurality of knives has a respective positioning device and respective selection device (as seen in figures 4-6, at 72), wherein each respective selection device is arranged to select between a first operational mode wherein its respective knife is selected and a second operational mode wherein its respective knife is de-selected; wherein the plurality of knives are configured to move separately or together or in groups between the cutting and non-cutting positions (page 4, paragraph 0049]).
Regarding claim 19: Claeys discloses an agricultural harvester (as seen in figure 1, generally 1) comprising a crop pick-up device (as seen in figure 1, at 7), a crop receiving station (as seen in figure 1, area of 8), and the cutter device as defined by claim 1, wherein the cutter device is configured to transfer crop along a feed path from the crop pick-up device to the crop receiving station (page 3, paragraphs [0042] and [0043]); wherein the agricultural harvester comprises a round baler, a square baler or a loading wagon (as seen in figure 1; also, page 2, paragraph [0026]).
Regarding claim 20: Claeys discloses a knife (as seen in figures 4-6, generally 18) for a cutter device for an agricultural harvester (as seen in figure 1, generally 1), the knife comprising: a cutting edge (as seen in figure 4, at 25) comprising a top part of the knife, which is configured to cut an agricultural crop moving along a flow path over the knife; a pivot mechanism (as seen in figure 4, at 28 and 24) comprising a pivot shaft (as seen in figure 4, at 24) that is partially circular in transverse cross section, a circular hole formed in a front end of the knife and a shaft slot that extends forwards from the circular hole to the front end of the knife (as seen in figure 6, area of 29 and as shown in annotated figure below), an arrangement being such that the pivot shaft is insertable into and removal from the circular hole via the shaft slot, and in a condition wherein the pivot shaft is located in the circular hole, the knife is rotatable about the pivot shaft (page 3, paragraph [0044]); and an engaging formation comprising a rearwards-facing slot (as seen in figure 4, at 48 and as shown in annotated figure below) that opens through a rear part of the knife for engaging a positioning device (as seen in figure 4, area of 47) that controls pivoting movement of the knife between a cutting position (as seen in figure 4) and a non-cutting position (as seen in figure 5), wherein the rearwards-facing slot extends substantially in the direction of the pivot axis of the knife, and the maximum length of the rewards-facing slot is greater than the maximum width of the rearwards-facing slot (as seen in figures 4-6).
PNG
media_image1.png
254
363
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21: Claeys discloses a method of detaching a replaceable knife from a cutter device of an agricultural harvester (as seen in figure 1, generally 1), the cutter device comprising a rotor (as seen in figure 2, at 13, also page 3, paragraph [0042]) with a plurality of tines (as seen in figure 2, at 15, also page 3, paragraph [0042]) that is rotatable to transfer an agricultural crop along a feed path, at least one replaceable knife (as seen in figures 4-6, generally 18) that is pivotable about a pivot shaft (as seen in figure 4, at 24) between a cutting position in the feed path in which it cooperates with the rotor to cut the crop (as seen in figure 4), and a non-cutting position in which it is withdrawn from the feed path (as seen in figure 5), and a positioning device (as seen in figures 4-6, area of 47) that controls movement of the knife between the cutting position and the non-cutting position, wherein the positioning device is adjustable between a first position in which it positions the knife in the cutting position (as seen in figure 4) and a second position in which it positions the knife in the non-cutting position (as seen in figure 5),
the method comprising:
moving the positioning device to a third position (as seen in figure 6) in which it is disengaged from the knife to allow movement of the knife independently of the positioning device from the non-cutting position towards and beyond the cutting position,
rotating the knife from the non-cutting position towards and beyond the cutting position, and,.
separating the knife from the pivot shaft (page 3, paragraph [0044]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claeys et al. (USPGPub 2022/0000026).
Regarding claim 17: Claeys discloses the cutter device of claim 1 substantially as discussed above. Further, Claeys discloses the cutter device including a bottom plate beneath the rotor (as seen in figure 3, at 22), wherein the feed path is located between the rotor and the bottom plate (as seen in figure 2, denoted in the area of arrow 8); and wherein the knife has a rear edge that extends at an angle relative to the bottom plate (as seen in figures 3 and 4, at 18) but fails to disclose the angle as being at least 60 degrees. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the angle of the knife edge limitation disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 15 and 16 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 9, 15 and 16: The prior art does not disclose or fairly suggest in combination with other claimed features/limitations “the positioning device is arranged such that when the knife is at an intermediate position approximately mid-way between the cutting position and the non-cutting position, there is substantial alignment between the pivot axis of the knife, the engaging formations and the pivot axis of the positioning device” of claim 9 or “the control mechanism including a selection device for selective connecting the positioning device to the control element” of claim 15.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Figgins (USPGPub 2023/0157213) discloses a baler with a knife positioning means and actuator.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT ERIC PEZZUTO whose telephone number is (703)756-1320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3:30pm.
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 M. 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.
/ROBERT E PEZZUTO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671