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 .
Claims 1-4 and 6-20 are pending
Claims 1 and 6 have been amended
Claim 5 has been canceled
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.
Claim 20 refers to “a housing”, however, claim 1 from which claim 20 ultimately depends also refers to “a housing”. It is unclear if these are the same components or difference components.
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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-11, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 20780309 (CN’309) (cited in the IDS filed 12-18-23, machine translation provided used for citation) in view of Hui US 2020/0094700 (US’700).
Regarding claim 1, CN’309 teaches a system for removing manure from a floor in a barn for animals (an intelligent robot for cleaning pig or animal dung, abstract, fig. 1 and 3), comprising: an autonomous manure removing vehicle (robot 1, see fig. 3), comprising: a drive system for driving the manure removing vehicle the drive system being provided with at least one electric drive motor (a walking mechanism driving the robot to move towards the appointed direction including motors, page 2, see fig. 3); an electronic control system operatively connected to the drive system (the drive control module is installed in the middle of the shell, the driving control module is equipped with various control circuit needed by the robot control, page 2-3); and a battery system configured to store electrical energy (the robot includes a battery pack, page 2-3), which battery system is connected to the drive system and the control system (the battery of the robot would necessarily be the source of power for the motors of the drive system, page 5-6); and a charging station configured to charge the battery system of the manure removing vehicle (a washing charging device, page 4, see fig. 1-2), the charging station including a transmitting body having a primary coil (wireless charger 2-8, see fig.2, page 4 and 8), and the manure removing vehicle including a receiving body having a secondary coil (the robot includes a charging coil module, page 8), wherein the manure removing vehicle is maneuverable relative to the transmitting body of the charging station such that the primary coil and the secondary coil are alignable to wirelessly transfer electrical energy from the primary coil to the secondary coil to wireless charge of the battery system of the manure removing vehicle (with automatic identification quantity, the electric quantity is not enough can be actively charging, ensures the enough electric quantity, automatically charging can guarantee the work efficiency, therefore, the robot can automatically move to the charging device when the battery charge is low to guarantee work efficiency, page 3) and the manure removing vehicle includes a housing forming an electrical enclosure that accommodates at least a portion of the control system and/or battery system (the robot include a circular housing 1 for containing the components of the robot, page 5-8, see fig. 1 and 3).
CN’309 does not teach wherein the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle.
US’700 teaches a method for charging an electric vehicle including domestic or industrial robots (abstract, para. 5 and 42). The charging circuit including a transmitter coil arranged for wirelessly transferring power to a receiver coil of an electric vehicle to charge the electric vehicle; and a movement mechanism arranged to enable movement of the transmitter coil for aligning the transmitter coil with a receiver coil arranged at a upper end of a chassis of an electric vehicle (para. 4, see fig. 8a-d). Wireless charging from the top as supposed to the bottom of the vehicle reduces misalignment problem, and thus can obtain high energy efficiency, resulting in significant cost savings compared with known wireless charging methods. The position of the transmitter coil/pad also allows it to be away from the dirt and dust on the ground, reducing its likeliness of being tramped upon, because the transmitter coil and receiver coil is separated only by tens of millimeters, a high magnetic coupling coefficient and high energy efficiency can be obtained. Also, there is less magnetic flux leakage and hence the associated problems such as human exposure and heating of nearby foreign objects are reduced (para. 87-90, 143-149, see fig. 2-3 and 8-a-d). US’700 further teaches the receiver pad 406A with the receiver coil is arranged beneath the top surface of the chassis. In the embodiment of FIG. 6C, a protrusion 602C is formed on the upper end (e.g., roof) of the chassis 600C of the vehicle. The receiver pad 406C with the receiver coil is arranged beneath the top wall of the protrusion 602C. In this example, the protrusion 602C is used as a dock or docking portion for engage with a transmitter pad 506C in which the transmitter coil is arranged, preventing misalignment (para. 117-133, see fig. 6a-c and 8a-b). In a preferred embodiment, the receiver pad 406 includes a plastic housing. The receiver pad 406 may include a water-proof layer and an electric shield for protecting and improving the operational effectiveness of the receiver coil 404. In particular, the water-proof layer may be arranged to provide water insulation function (para.98). Therefore, US’700 further teaches arranging the receiving coil within a protrusion of a roof the vehicle within a water-proof housing to provide water insulation function. This arrangement reads on the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing since the receiving pad is vertically higher than the top of the roof surrounding the protrusion. Further, the water-proof layer and housing roof would substantially seal against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of CN’309 to include wherein the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle, and the manure removing vehicle includes a housing forming an electrical enclosure that accommodates at least a portion of the control system and/or battery system, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle because US’700 teaches it can improve energy efficiency resulting in cost savings, preventing misalignment, keeps the transmitter coil off the ground to prevent damage caused by dirt and dust and trampling and provide water insulation function and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Regarding claim 2, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 1. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the transmitting body of the charging station comprises a downwardly facing flat surface, wherein the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle comprises an upwardly facing flat surface, and wherein the transmitting body of the charging station and the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle are arranged in such a way that the downwardly facing flat surface of the transmitting body of the charging station is arrangeable over and/or on top of the upwardly facing flat surface of the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle (see US’700, fig. 6a-c and 8a-d, para. 117-133).
Regarding claims 3 and 16-17, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claims 1 and 2. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the top side of the manure removing vehicle is defined by a substantially flattened top surface, and wherein the receiving body extends along said top surface (see US’700, fig. 6a-c and 8a-d, para. 117-133). US’700 further teaches
The modified system of CN’309 is silent with regard to the height of the robot such that the flattened top surface defines a maximum height of the manure removing vehicle of between 50 and 80 cm, with regard to claim 3, the flattened top surface defines a maximum height of the manure removing vehicle of 60 or 70 cm, with regard to claim 16 and the flattened top surface defines a maximum height of the manure removing vehicle of between 50 and 80 cm, with regard to claim 17.
However, CN’309 teaches the robot include a circular housing 1 for containing the components of the robot. the clearing robot shell is circular, the radius 0.5-1.5 m and other components according to the size of the robot shell suitable for setting the size, in order to prevent the excrement cleaning robot shell caused by accidental collision damage to the shell. The robot housing shell is sized to be large enough to contain the components and perform the function of removing animal dung, while being small enough to be maneuverable around animals (page 5-8, see fig. 1 and 3). The system of the instant claims is also sized for the purpose of removing manure, therefore selecting the height of the top surface to be within applicants claimed range would have been obvious.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to modify the modified system of CN’309 to include the height of the robot such that the flattened top surface defines a maximum height of the manure removing vehicle of between 50 and 80 cm, with regard to claim 3, the flattened top surface defines a maximum height of the manure removing vehicle of 60 or 70 cm, with regard to claim 16 and the flattened top surface defines a maximum height of the manure removing vehicle of between 50 and 80 cm, with regard to claim 17 because CN’309 teaches the robot housing shell is sized to be large enough to contain the components and perform the function of removing animal dung, while being small enough to be maneuverable around animals and where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device, see MPEP 2144.04 .IV. (A).
Regarding claim 4, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 1. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the receiving body is arranged in a vertical central longitudinal plane of the manure removing vehicle (see US’700, fig. 6a-c and 8a-d, para. 117-133).
Regarding claim 7, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 1. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the transmitting body is arranged on the charging station at a distance above the floor (see US’700, fig. 6a-c and 8a-d, para. 117-133).
Regarding claim 8, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 7. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the transmitting body of the charging station is situated at a height which is adapted in such a way to the height of the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle that, by maneuvering the manure removing vehicle in the charging station, the transmitting body of the charging station is engageable by the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle, and the transmitting body and the receiving body are arrangeable over and/or on top of one another in order to wirelessly transfer electrical energy from the primary coil of the transmitting body to the secondary coil of the receiving body (see US’700, fig. 6a-c and 8a-d, para. 117-133).
Regarding claim 9, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 8. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the receiving body is fastened rigidly to the manure removing vehicle, and wherein the transmitting body of the charging station is movable from a waiting state by engaging with the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle which enters the charging station, in such a way that the primary coil of the transmitting body and the secondary coil of the receiving body are aligned above one another in a charging state in order to wirelessly transfer electrical energy from the primary coil to the secondary coil (see US’700, fig. 8a-d, para. 117-133).
Regarding claim 10, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 1. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the primary coil of the transmitting body and the secondary coil of the receiving body are at a distance apart which is less than 5 cm, when the primary coil of the transmitting body of the charging station and the secondary coil of the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle are aligned over one another in order to wirelessly transfer electrical energy from the primary coil to the secondary coil (the alignment mechanism is arranged to align the transmitter coil with the receiver coil such that one or more of the following conditions are satisfied: a spacing between the transmitter coil and the receiver coil is smaller than 50 mm, para. 20 and 111).
Regarding claim 11, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 1. CN’309 further teaches wherein the manure removing vehicle comprises a manure slider for moving manure over the floor (push shovel 13, page 5).
Regarding claim 18-19, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 2-3. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the receiving body is arranged in a vertical central longitudinal plane of the manure removing vehicle (see US’700, fig. 8a-d, para. 117-133).
Regarding claim 20, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 2. The modified method of CN’309 further teaches wherein the manure removing vehicle comprises a housing, in which the control system and/or the battery system are at least partly arranged, and wherein the receiving body, viewed in a vertical direction, extends at least partly directly above the housing, as discussed above.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’309 in view of US’700 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Horn US 2021/0386260 (US’260).
Regarding claim 6, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 1.
The modified system of CN’309 does not teach wherein the housing is provided with an access opening in order to make the interior thereof accessible, and a cover is movable between a closed position, in which the access opening is closed by the cover, and an open position, in which the interior of the housing is accessible via the access opening, and wherein the access opening and the cover extend on the top side of the manure removing vehicle and the receiving body is provided on the cover.
US’260 teaches a system for collecting waste from an area includes a robotic device including a housing, a control system within the housing, which includes a processor system and a memory system in operative connection with the processor system, a power system in operative connection with the control system (abstract). The system includes a lid 120a forming the top surface of the robot for providing access to the interior components of the robot (see fig. 3a-h, para. 38 and 50). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would know to provide the cover with a lid for accessing the interior components of the modified robot of CN’309.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified system of CN’309 to include wherein the housing is provided with an access opening in order to make the interior thereof accessible, and a cover is movable between a closed position, in which the access opening is closed by the cover, and an open position, in which the interior of the housing is accessible via the access opening, and wherein the access opening and the cover extend on the top side of the manure removing vehicle and the receiving body is provided on the cover because US’260 teaches it is known in the art to provide the cover with a lid for accessing the interior components of the modified robot of CN’309 and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Claim(s) 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’309 in view of US’700 as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Hillforth et al. US 2014/0124000 (US’000).
Regarding claims 12-13, the modified system of CN’309 teaches the system for removing manure from a floor of claim 1.
The modified system of CN’309 does not teach wherein the manure removing vehicle is provided with a manure storage container, a manure discharge opening for discharging manure from the manure storage container, and a manure feed device for feeding manure from the floor and moving the fed-in manure to the manure storage container, with regard to claim 12 and wherein the charging station is provided with a dump opening in the floor for dumping manure from the manure discharge opening of the manure storage container through the dump opening into a manure reservoir which extends under the floor, with regard to claim 13.
US’000 teaches a manure-removal vehicle and an assembly thereof having a manure-discharging location (abstract). The vehicle includes a storage container 2, floor scraper 13 delimits the rear side of a manure suctioning storage chamber 14 which is connected to a manure inlet opening 15 to the tank 2. the manure suctioning storage chamber 14 of the vehicle 1 has been driven as far as the dumping opening 29 in the floor 30 of, for example, an animal shed. The manure 27 in the tank 2 of the vehicle 1 will then run via the manure inlet opening 15 into the manure pit 28 in the direction of arrow C (para. 76-93, fig. 1-3). Therefore, the components recited in claims 12 and 13 are known in the art of manure removal and combining the dumping structure with the chagrining structure would have been an obvious combination of prior art elements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified system of CN’309 to include wherein the manure removing vehicle is provided with a manure storage container, a manure discharge opening for discharging manure from the manure storage container, and a manure feed device for feeding manure from the floor and moving the fed-in manure to the manure storage container, with regard to claim 12 and wherein the charging station is provided with a dump opening in the floor for dumping manure from the manure discharge opening of the manure storage container through the dump opening into a manure reservoir which extends under the floor, with regard to claim 13 because US’000 teaches these are known in the art of manure removal and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 20780309 (CN’309) (machine translation, provided used for citation) in view of Hui US 2020/0094700 (US’700).
Regarding claim 14, CN’309 teaches in combination, a barn for keeping animals (animal husbandry pig barn page 1, see fig. 1) and the system as claimed in claim 1 (as discussed above with regard to claim 1).
CN’309 does not teach wherein the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle.
US’700 teaches a method for charging an electric vehicle including domestic or industrial robots (abstract, para. 5 and 42). The charging circuit including a transmitter coil arranged for wirelessly transferring power to a receiver coil of an electric vehicle to charge the electric vehicle; and a movement mechanism arranged to enable movement of the transmitter coil for aligning the transmitter coil with a receiver coil arranged at a upper end of a chassis of an electric vehicle (para. 4, see fig. 8a-d). Wireless charging from the top as supposed to the bottom of the vehicle reduces misalignment problem, and thus can obtain high energy efficiency, resulting in significant cost savings compared with known wireless charging methods. The position of the transmitter coil/pad also allows it to be away from the dirt and dust on the ground, reducing its likeliness of being tramped upon, because the transmitter coil and receiver coil is separated only by tens of millimeters, a high magnetic coupling coefficient and high energy efficiency can be obtained. Also, there is less magnetic flux leakage and hence the associated problems such as human exposure and heating of nearby foreign objects are reduced (para. 87-90, 143-149, see fig. 2-3 and 8-a-d). US’700 further teaches the receiver pad 406A with the receiver coil is arranged beneath the top surface of the chassis. In the embodiment of FIG. 6C, a protrusion 602C is formed on the upper end (e.g., roof) of the chassis 600C of the vehicle. The receiver pad 406C with the receiver coil is arranged beneath the top wall of the protrusion 602C. In this example, the protrusion 602C is used as a dock or docking portion for engage with a transmitter pad 506C in which the transmitter coil is arranged, preventing misalignment (para. 117-133, see fig. 6a-c and 8a-b). In a preferred embodiment, the receiver pad 406 includes a plastic housing. The receiver pad 406 may include a water-proof layer and an electric shield for protecting and improving the operational effectiveness of the receiver coil 404. In particular, the water-proof layer may be arranged to provide water insulation function (para.98). Therefore, US’700 further teaches arranging the receiving coil within a protrusion of a roof the vehicle within a water-proof housing to provide water insulation function. This arrangement reads on the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing since the receiving pad is vertically higher than the top of the roof surrounding the protrusion. Further, the water-proof layer and housing roof would substantially seal against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of CN’309 to include wherein the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle, and the manure removing vehicle includes a housing forming an electrical enclosure that accommodates at least a portion of the control system and/or battery system, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle because US’700 teaches it can improve energy efficiency resulting in cost savings, preventing misalignment, keeps the transmitter coil off the ground to prevent damage caused by dirt and dust and trampling and provide water insulation function and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 20780309 (CN’309) (machine translation, provided used for citation) in view of Hui US 2020/0094700 (US’700).
Regarding claim 15, CN’309 teaches a method for removing manure from a floor in a barn for animals (an intelligent robot for removing excrement in an animal husbandry pig barn, page 1 see fig. 1), in which use is made of the system as claimed claim 1 (as discussed above), and wherein the method comprises: moving the autonomous manure removing vehicle across the floor of the barn in order to remove manure from the floor (an intelligent robot for removing excrement in an animal husbandry pig barn, page 1 and 4-5 see fig. 1); moving the manure removing vehicle to the charging station (the robot moves to the washing charging device 2 when it needs to charge, page 2-4, see fig. 1-2); and wirelessly charging the battery system of the manure removing vehicle in the charging station by wirelessly transmitting electrical energy from the primary coil of the transmitting body of the charging station to the secondary coil of the receiving body of the manure removing vehicle (the robot includes a battery pack and is charge wireless with coils in the charging device and the robot, see fig.2, page 2-4 and 8, page 2-3)
CN’309 does not teach wherein the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle.
US’700 teaches a method for charging an electric vehicle including domestic or industrial robots (abstract, para. 5 and 42). The charging circuit including a transmitter coil arranged for wirelessly transferring power to a receiver coil of an electric vehicle to charge the electric vehicle; and a movement mechanism arranged to enable movement of the transmitter coil for aligning the transmitter coil with a receiver coil arranged at a upper end of a chassis of an electric vehicle (para. 4, see fig. 8a-d). Wireless charging from the top as supposed to the bottom of the vehicle reduces misalignment problem, and thus can obtain high energy efficiency, resulting in significant cost savings compared with known wireless charging methods. The position of the transmitter coil/pad also allows it to be away from the dirt and dust on the ground, reducing its likeliness of being tramped upon, because the transmitter coil and receiver coil is separated only by tens of millimeters, a high magnetic coupling coefficient and high energy efficiency can be obtained. Also, there is less magnetic flux leakage and hence the associated problems such as human exposure and heating of nearby foreign objects are reduced (para. 87-90, 143-149, see fig. 2-3 and 8-a-d). US’700 further teaches the receiver pad 406A with the receiver coil is arranged beneath the top surface of the chassis. In the embodiment of FIG. 6C, a protrusion 602C is formed on the upper end (e.g., roof) of the chassis 600C of the vehicle. The receiver pad 406C with the receiver coil is arranged beneath the top wall of the protrusion 602C. In this example, the protrusion 602C is used as a dock or docking portion for engage with a transmitter pad 506C in which the transmitter coil is arranged, preventing misalignment (para. 117-133, see fig. 6a-c and 8a-b). In a preferred embodiment, the receiver pad 406 includes a plastic housing. The receiver pad 406 may include a water-proof layer and an electric shield for protecting and improving the operational effectiveness of the receiver coil 404. In particular, the water-proof layer may be arranged to provide water insulation function (para.98). Therefore, US’700 further teaches arranging the receiving coil within a protrusion of a roof the vehicle within a water-proof housing to provide water insulation function. This arrangement reads on the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing since the receiving pad is vertically higher than the top of the roof surrounding the protrusion. Further, the water-proof layer and housing roof would substantially seal against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of CN’309 to include wherein the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle, and the manure removing vehicle includes a housing forming an electrical enclosure that accommodates at least a portion of the control system and/or battery system, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle because US’700 teaches it can improve energy efficiency resulting in cost savings, preventing misalignment, keeps the transmitter coil off the ground to prevent damage caused by dirt and dust and trampling and provide water insulation function and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-20 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/571031 in view of Hui US 2020/0094700 (US’700).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claim 1 of the instant application requires all the limitations of claim 1 of a system for removing manure from a floor in a barn for animals, comprising: an autonomous manure removing vehicle, comprising: a drive system for driving the manure removing vehicle, the drive system being provided with at least one electric drive motor; an electronic control system operatively connected to the drive system; and a battery system configured to store electrical energy, which battery system is connected to the drive system and the control system; and a charging station configured to charge the battery system of the manure removing vehicle,
The only difference between the instant application and copending Application No. 18/571031 is that 18/571031 describes the position of the receiving body as fastened rigidly to the manure removing vehicle and the instant application recites the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle and the manure removing vehicle includes a housing forming an electrical enclosure that accommodates at least a portion of the control system and/or battery system, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle.
However, positioning the receiving body on the top surface and including the housing and receiving body arrangement as claimed would have been obvious based on the teachings of US’700 discussed above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of 18/571031 to include wherein the receiving body is arranged on a top side of the manure removing vehicle, and the manure removing vehicle includes a housing forming an electrical enclosure that accommodates at least a portion of the control system and/or battery system, and wherein, in a vertical direction, the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing such that a connection between the receiving body and the control system and/or battery system is substantially sealed against soiling from inside and outside the manure removing vehicle because US’700 teaches it can improve energy efficiency resulting in cost savings, preventing misalignment and keeps the transmitter coil off the ground to prevent damage caused by dirt and dust and trampling and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Claims 2-20 are further rendered obvious based on the prior art rejection of claims 2-20 discussed above
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to independent claim 1 to include subject matter regarding the housing and positioning of the receiving body has changed the scope of claim 1. However, upon further consideration, the teachings of CN’309 in view of US’700 still appear to read on the claimed invention therefore a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 103 as obvious over CN’309 in view of US’700 which includes both the rejection of claim 1 as stated in the non-final office action mailed 10-1-25 and additional discussion regarding the teachings of US’700 relating to the features added to claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11-14-25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants arguments that the amendments have over come the double patenting rejection have been considered but is not deemed persuasive. As discussed above, the teachings of US’700 still appear to render obvious the limitations of claim 1.
In response to applicant's argument that Hui is nonanalogous art to a barn-cleaning robot, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Hui is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, namely protecting wireless charging interface from environmental contamination. Hui expressly teaches mounting a wireless charging coil on the top of a vehicle and enclosing it for waterproof insulation and shielding from dirt and debris, as discussed above, which protects the wireless charging coil for environmental dirt and moisture. These teachings would be relevant and applicable to any vehicle which operates in an outdoor environment. Additionally, both Hui and CN’309 are within the art of wireless vehicle charging.
Applicant’s argument, see pages 10-11 of remarks filed, that Although in par. [0095] Hui does state that the receiver coil being placed at the upper end of the chassis may be one of the roof, hood, trunk or windshield, depending on the vehicle type, Hui's examples for top-side placement (roof, hood, trunk, windshield) all teach away from putting an electrical enclosure directly beneath them, has been considered but is not deemed persuasive. As discussed above, Hui further teaches arranging the receiving coil within a protrusion of a roof the vehicle within a water-proof housing to provide water insulation function and to prevent misalignment of the charging coils. This arrangement reads on the receiving body extends at least partially directly above the housing since the receiving pad is vertically higher than the top of the roof surrounding the protrusion. Additionally, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, Hui teaches an arrangement of a battery coil for wireless vehicle charging within a protrusion of a vehicle chassis protects against environmental contamination and prevents misalignment of the charging coils. Such teaches can be applied to any vehicle chagrining process that uses wireless charging, predictably providing the benefits discussed above without modifying the underlying vehicle purpose of CN’309.
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 ERIN FLANAGAN BERGNER whose telephone number is (571)270-1133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
/ERIN F BERGNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713