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 § 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, 2, 5-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fanshier et al. (US 2020/0068782).
As concerns claim 1, Fanshier shows a planter implement (14), comprising: a frame (16, 20, 50); at least one wheel support member (48) coupled to the frame (Fig. 3A-3C); at least one wheel (28) carried by the at least one wheel support member (Fig. 3A-3C); and a toolbar (44) coupled to (via 30) the at least one wheel support member at a pivot point (52).
As concerns claim 2, Fanshier shows wherein the toolbar (44) is coupled to the at least one wheel support member (48) by at least one toolbar support member (30), wherein the at least one toolbar support member is rigidly coupled to the toolbar and rotatably coupled (via 52) to the at least one wheel support member (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 5, Fanshier shows at least one actuator (32A) configured to change an angle of the toolbar support member (30) relative to the wheel support member (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 6, Fanshier shows wherein the at least one toolbar support member (30) exhibits a length greater than a radius of the at least one wheel (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 7, Fanshier shows wherein the at least one wheel support member (48) exhibits a length greater than a radius of the at least one wheel (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 8, Fanshier shows wherein the at least one wheel support member (48) carries an axle (hub) of the at least one wheel (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 9, Fanshier shows wherein the at least one wheel support member (48) is rigidly coupled to the frame (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 10, Fanshier shows wherein the frame comprises: a first section (26) configured to be towed by a tractor (12); and a wing section (24) hingedly coupled to the first section, wherein the at least one wheel support member is coupled to the wing section (Fig. 1).
As concerns claim 11, Fanshier shows at least one actuator (32A) configured to change a position of the toolbar (44) relative to the frame (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 12, Fanshier shows a plurality of planter row units (38) carried by the toolbar (Fig. 1 & 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 13, Fanshier shows a hopper (18 [product container]) carried by the frame and configured to supply material to each of the planter row units (Fig. 1; paragraph 0017).
As concerns claim 14, Fanshier shows wherein the at least one wheel support member (48) is configured to carry the at least one wheel (28) on either of two lateral sides of the at least one wheel support member (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 15, Fanshier shows a planter implement (14), comprising: a frame (16, 20, 50) configured to be towed through an agricultural field (Fig. 1), the frame comprising a first section (26) and at least one wing section (24) hingedly coupled to the first section (Fig. 1); a wheel support member (48) having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end is rigidly coupled to the at least one wing section (Fig. 3A-3C); a wheel (28) carried by the second end of the wheel support member and configured to support the at least one wing section in the field (Fig. 1 & 3A-3C); a toolbar support member (30) having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end is coupled to the second end of the wheel support member at a pivot point (52); a toolbar (44) coupled to the second end of the toolbar support member (Fig. 3A-3C); and an actuator (32A) configured to change a position of the toolbar relative to the frame (Fig. 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 16, Fanshier shows a plurality of planter row units (38) carried by the toolbar (Fig. 1 & 3A-3C).
As concerns claim 18, Fanshier shows wherein the toolbar support member (30) is rotatably coupled (via 52) to the second end of the wheel support member (48) at the pivot point (Fig. 3A-3C).
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.
Claims 3, 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fanshier et al. as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Gresch et al. (US 2018/0035622).
As concerns claim 3, Fanshier shows wherein the toolbar (44) is coupled to the at least one wheel support member (48) by at least one toolbar support member (30), wherein the at least one toolbar support member is rigidly coupled to the toolbar and rotatably coupled (via 52) to the at least one wheel support member (Fig. 3A-3C). Fanshier discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the at least one toolbar support member is rotatably coupled to the toolbar. Gresch teaches wherein a support member (32, 34) is rotatably coupled to a first member (36) and rotatably coupled to a second member (30). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Fanshier, as taught by Gresch, to utilize a pair of parallel links as the toolbar support member for the expected benefit of maintaining the orientation of the toolbar relative to the soil while raising and lowering the toolbar. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that using a pair of parallel links as the toolbar support member to couple the toolbar to the wheel support member would have provided predictable results and a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since the expected result of this configuration improves versatility/adaptability/efficiency of the planter implement design.
As concerns claims 4 and 17, the combination teaches wherein the at least one toolbar support member comprises a pair of parallel links (Gresch: 32, 34).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument that Fanshier does not expressly or inherently disclose a toolbar coupled to the at least one wheel support member at a pivot point, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Fanshier discloses, in paragraph 0026, that the frame member (20) further comprises a bracket arm (48) extending rearwardly from the drawbar (50), and in one embodiment, is coupled to a hub of the wheel (28) and also pivotably coupled at hinge point (52) to the bracket arm (30) of the (rear) frame member (22). Thus, Fanshier shows at least one wheel support member (48) coupled to a frame (20, 50); at least one wheel (28) carried by the at least one wheel support member (Fig. 3A-3C); and a toolbar (44) coupled to (via bracket arm 30) the at least one wheel support member (48) at a pivot point (52). Therefore, Fanshier meets the claim language.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MATTHEW R BUCK whose telephone number is (571)270-3653. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-5.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571)272-5405. 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.
/MATTHEW R BUCK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights