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 .
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 1, 4-7, 9-18 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 “the accessory is directly connected to the receiver without any further connections” in lines 10-11. However, figures 11-12 show that the accessory 320 is connected to receiver 302 with further connections in the form of coaxial holes 310 and holes 338. Claim 5 specifies that a securing element is received in the coaxial holes. Since there does not appear to be a disclosed embodiment where the accessory is connected to the receiver without further connections, the metes and bounds of this newly added limitation cannot be determined, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim 5 is rejected for similar reasons used to reject claim 1, as it is not understood how the accessory can be attached both without any further connections and with a pair of coaxial holes and a securing element.
Claim 9 recites the machine of claim 1 in combination with an accessory coupled to the receiver. However, claim 1 recites “the receiver removably connecting an accessory to the front axle assembly” in lines 9-10. Claim 1 recites the combination of a machine and an accessory, the combination of the accessory to the machine in claim 9 is redundant, and makes it unclear if an additional accessory is to be coupled to the machine.
Claims 4-7, 9-18 are rejected as they depend upon claim 1.
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)(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, 4-5, 8-10, 12, 15, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wei (US 20200404828 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wei discloses an outdoor power machine, comprising:
a chassis (frame 10) including main frame rails;
two or more drive wheel assemblies physically mounted to the chassis, each drive wheel assembly coupled to an electric motor (a motor group, paragraph 0024);
an electric power pack (a power supply, paragraph 0024) configured to supply electric energy to the electric motors;
one or more steer wheels; and
an electric power takeoff assembly (41, 47, see fig. 3) integrated with a front axle assembly (10) of the chassis, including:
a receiver (connector 41) attached to a bottom of the front axle assembly (see fig. 3 below), the receiver removably connecting an accessory (30) to the front axle assembly, wherein the accessory is directly connected to the receiver without any further connections; and
an electric receptacle (electrical interface 47) extending into the front axle assembly adjacent to the receiver and electrically coupled to the electric power pack, the electric receptacle (47) receives an electrical connector therein (paragraph 0039) to provide electric energy from the electric power pack to the accessory (30).
PNG
media_image1.png
630
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, wherein the receiver (41) comprises a square tube (see fig. 4).
Regarding claim 5, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, where the receiver includes a pair of coaxial holes (412) for receiving a securing element.
Regarding claim 9, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine claim of 1, in combination with an accessory (30) coupled to the receiver (41).
Regarding claim 10, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine claim 9, wherein the accessory (30) is coupled to the receiver (41) and is connected to the electric receptacle (47).
Regarding claim 12, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 9 wherein the accessory (30) includes a receiver mount (42) having a sheet complementary to the receiver (see fig. 4).
Regarding claim 15, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, further including a ground- engaging attachment (20) connected to the chassis (10).
Regarding claim 18, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, further including a seat for an operator (see fig. 1-3).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (US 20200404828 A1) in view of Shell (US 20150225924 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1.
Weri does not disclose a reinforcement bracket extending between the receiver (41) and a bottom of the front axle assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, Shell discloses a bracket (29, see fig. 1) extending between a receiver (22) and the element to which the receiver is attached (21).
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 the receiver of Wei with a bracket extending between it and the bottom of the axle assembly, as disclosed by Shell, to provide support to the receiver and provide additional strength to the welded connection between the receiver and axle assembly (Shell, paragraph 0052).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (US 20200404828 A1) in view of Siudyla (US 9867331 B1).
Regarding claim 7, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1.
Wei does not disclose a switch controlling operation of the electric receptacle (47).
In the same field of endeavor, Siudyla discloses an electric power pack configured to supply electric energy to electric motors, an electric receptacle coupled to the power pack having a switch (PTO switch 180p, col. 3 lines 25-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide Wei with a switch controlling operation of the electric receptacle, as disclosed by Siudyla, so an operator may selectively provide power to the electric receptacle.
Claims 11, 13-14, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (US 20200404828 A1) in view of Conrad (US 20160120131 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 9. Wei discloses that electrical interface (47) provides electrical power to an accessory (30, paragraph 0039).
Wei does not disclose where the accessory includes at least one of an electric motor and an electric actuator.
In the same field of endeavor, Conrad discloses an outdoor power machine (a mower) that carries an accessory (blower 10) including an electric motor (34).
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 accessory of Wei with an electric motor, as disclosed by Conrad, as a way of transferring the electric power provided by the interface to the accessory.
Regarding claim 13, Wei, of the resultant combination, discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 12 further comprising a securing element (431) passing through aligned openings in the receiver mount (42) and the receiver (41).
Regarding claim 14, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 9 where the accessory (30) is a blower (paragraph 0003).
Wei does not disclose the blower including at least one electrically-powered fan.
In the same field of endeavor, Conrad discloses an outdoor power machine (a mower) that carries an accessory (blower 10) including an electric fan (22).
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 blower of Wei with an electric fan, as disclosed by Conrad, as a way of transferring the electric power provided by the interface to the fan.
Regarding claim 16, Wei, of the resultant combination, discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 15, wherein the ground- engaging attachment is a mowing deck assembly, including:
a mowing deck (20);
an electric blade motor (paragraph 0024); and
a cutting blade coupled to the blade motor (paragraph 0025).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (US 20200404828 A1) in view of Oswald (US 20140174838 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Wei discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1.
Wei does not disclose a standing platform for an operator.
In the same field of endeavor, Oswald discloses an outdoor power machine having a standing platform for an operator as an optional alternative to a seat as it is useful or desirable in some contexts or by some operators (paragraph 0003).
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 machine of Wei with a standing platform, as disclosed by Oswald, as a desirable alternative to a seated operator platform.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The 4/8/2026 remarks argue that Wei does not disclose a receiver attached to a bottom of the front axle assembly and configured for direct connection to an accessory without further connections. However, Wei discloses a receiver attached to both a top and bottom of a front axle assembly, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above. Additionally, the amendment to specify that the connection of the accessory to the receiver is without further connections does not appear to supported by the original disclosure (which describes the additional connection of axial through holes and a securing element) and is addressed in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 6 have been considered but are moot as the new grounds of rejection is applied utilizing a new interpretation of the prior art reference in light of the claim amendments, please see the rejection above.
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.
/MADELINE I RUNCO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights