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 § 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) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoenrock (US 2467501 A) in view of Tan et al. (WO 2017150630 A1) and Van Overschelde et al. (US 10149437 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Schoenrock discloses a platform header (see Fig. 1) for harvesting agricultural crops in a field comprising:
a header frame (see below) extending between a front portion (see below) and opposite rear portion (see below) and laterally between opposite sides (see below);
a cutting assembly [4] operatively coupled to the front portion between the opposite sides for cutting the crops to be harvested (see below);
a pair of support arms (not shown but inherently present in order to support the crop pick-up reel above the header);
a crop pick-up reel [6] rotatably coupled between the support arms for engaging the crops cut by the cutting assembly;
a belt feeder assembly [5] coupled to the header frame for receiving cut crops from the crop pick-up reel and transporting the cut crops from the cutting assembly across the rear portion of the header frame to an agricultural machine (see Col. 1, lines 36-44).
PNG
media_image1.png
692
629
media_image1.png
Greyscale
But Schoenrock fails to disclose a pair of support arms extending between a proximal end fixedly coupled to the rear portion of the header frame and an opposite distal end spaced above the front portion of the header frame; said belt feeder assembly including a front drum having an outer wall adjacent the front portion of the header frame and cutting assembly, a rear drum spaced from the front drum along the rear portion of the header frame, and a conveyor tensioned between the front and rear drum for carrying the cut crop across the rear portion of the header frame, wherein the front drum extends between a pair of opposite ends positioned adjacent to the opposite sides of the header frame; and a drive system mounted on the header frame and operatively coupled to one of the front or rear drums for rotatably driving the belt feeder assembly; wherein the front drum includes a plurality of fingers extending radially outwardly therefrom and adapted to pull the crops under the front drum to the rear portion of the header frame, each of the fingers operatively coupled between a fixed shaft extending axially through the front drum and a slot formed in the outer wall of the front drum, whereby the fingers protrude at varying distances from the outer wall as the front drum rotates about the fixed shaft to avoid interference with the conveyor.
Tan et al. discloses a similar platform header (see Fig. 1) comprising a pair of support arms (see below, other arm of pair is not shown but inherently present to support the pick-up reel) extending between a proximal end (see below) fixedly coupled to the rear portion (see below; fixedly coupled together through [12], see Fig. 2) of the header frame [6] and an opposite distal end (see below) spaced above the front portion of the header frame (see Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
467
679
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the support arms of Schoenrock with the support arms of Tan et al. since both are arms to support the crop pick-up reel for rotation above the header; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
But Tan et al. fails to disclose said belt feeder assembly including a front drum having an outer wall adjacent the front portion of the header frame and cutting assembly, a rear drum spaced from the front drum along the rear portion of the header frame, and a conveyor tensioned between the front and rear drum for carrying the cut crop across the rear portion of the header frame, wherein the front drum extends between a pair of opposite ends positioned adjacent to the opposite sides of the header frame; and a drive system mounted on the header frame and operatively coupled to one of the front or rear drums for rotatably driving the belt feeder assembly; wherein the front drum includes a plurality of fingers extending radially outwardly therefrom and adapted to pull the crops under the front drum to the rear portion of the header frame, each of the fingers operatively coupled between a fixed shaft extending axially through the front drum and a slot formed in the outer wall of the front drum, whereby the fingers protrude at varying distances from the outer wall as the front drum rotates about the fixed shaft to avoid interference with the conveyor.
Van Overschelde et al. discloses a similar platform header [1] comprising a belt feeder assembly [101] coupled to the header frame (header frame supports the feeder conveyor, see Col. 2, lines 66-67 and Col. 3, lines 1-2) for transporting the cut crops from the cutting assembly across the rear portion of the header frame (see Col. 3, lines 53-61) to an agricultural machine [100], said belt feeder assembly including a front drum [28' and 36] having an outer wall (see below) adjacent the front portion of the header frame and cutting assembly (front drum is located at the front portion of the header frame; therefore, adjacent to the cutting assembly coupled to the front portion), a rear drum [22] spaced from the front drum along the rear portion of the header frame (see Fig. 3), and a conveyor [29] tensioned between the front and rear drum for carrying the cut crop across the rear portion of the header frame (see Col. 3, lines 53-61);
a drive system ([24], see Col. 3, lines 28-31) for mounted on the header frame (mounted at the rear portion on the rear drum [22], see below) and operatively coupled to one of the front or rear drums (coupled to the rear drum [22] through gear wheel [24], see Fig. 3) for rotatably driving the belt feeder assembly;
wherein the front drum includes a plurality of fingers ([38], see Fig. 6 and Col. 4, lines 12-14) extending radially outwardly therefrom and adapted to pull the crops under the front drum to the rear portion of the header frame (belt feeder assembly rotates in direction of arrow in Fig. 3, moving belts backwards, see Col. 3, lines 53-57; therefore, the fingers pull the crop material under the front drum, see Col. 4, lines 25-29), each of the fingers operatively coupled between a fixed shaft (see below, mounted on stationary eccentric axles, see Col. 4, lines 14-19) extending axially through the front drum (fingers placed throughout the entire length of the drum; therefore, the fixed shaft extends axially through the drum, see Fig. 3) and a slot [37] formed in the outer wall of the front drum, whereby the fingers protrude at varying distances from the outer wall as the front drum rotates about the fixed shaft to avoid interference with the conveyor (see Fig. 6 and Col. 4, lines 12-21).
PNG
media_image3.png
522
534
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the belt feeder assembly of Schoenrock with the belt feeder assembly of Van Overschelde et al. since both are belt feeders used to transport material from the front to the rear of the header to be inserted into the agricultural harvester; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
Examiner's Note: the limitation "drum" has been given the broadest reasonable interpretation as being "a cylindrical machine or mechanical device or part" through the definition given by Merriam-Webster (see attached NPL for 'drum'). While Van Overschelde et al.'s rear drum [22] is called a drive shaft (see Col. 3, lines 21-24), it is well known in the art for a drive shaft to be a cylindrical part and therefore is analogous to a rear drum.
Regarding claim 2, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the opposite ends (see below) of the front drum [28' and 36] define a central rotational axis [27] therebetween and are rotatably coupled (through shaft [26]; see Col. 4, lines 6-10) between the opposite sides [11 and 12] of the header frame (frame of [7], see Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
684
753
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the rear drum [22] extends between opposite ends (see below) rotatably coupled (rotatably coupled through connection to the drive system [24], see Col. 3, lines 28-31) to the opposite sides [11 and 12] of the header frame [22].
PNG
media_image5.png
632
701
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the fixed shaft (see above) includes opposite end portions (end portions correlate with the end portions of the drum due to the fixed shaft running the length of the drum, see Fig. 3) fixedly coupled (the shaft is stationary; therefore fixedly coupled to the header frame, see Col. 4, lines 14-19) to the opposite sides [11 and 12] of the header frame [22] and at least one offset portion (entire shaft is offset to the central axis of the drum [36], see Fig. 6) between the end portions defining an offset rotational axis (see below; axis is center of offset portion and extends out of the page) eccentric to the central rotational axis [27] of the front drum [28' and 36].
PNG
media_image6.png
518
532
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the fingers [38] extend between a radially outer end (see below) extending through said respective slots [37] in the front drum [28' and 36] and an opposite radially inner end (see below) rotatably coupled to the offset portion (see above) of the fixed shaft (see above).
PNG
media_image7.png
522
541
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the rear drum [22] includes at least one sprocket [25] fixedly coupled thereto (see Col. 3, lines 32-34) and spaced laterally between the ends of the rear drum (see Fig. 3), wherein each of the sprockets includes a plurality of projections (each sprocket has sprockets engaging with the teeth on the belt, see Col. 3, lines 47-50; therefore, include a plurality of projections) adapted for operatively engaging and driving the conveyor [29] as the drive system ([24], see Col. 3, lines 28-31) rotates the rear drum.
Claim(s) 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoenrock (US 2468501 A), Tan et al. (WO 2017150630 A1) and Van Overschelde et al. (US 10149437 B2) as applied to claims 1-6 above, and further in view of Peters et al. (US 10647516 B2).
Regarding claim 7, Van Overschelde et al. discloses the platform header as applied above, as well as, the front drum [28' and 36] includes at least one sprocket ([28], see Col. 3, lines 42-44) spaced apart on the outer wall between the ends thereof (see Fig. 3), the sprocket laterally aligned (aligned to support belt conveyor [29], see Col. 3, lines 45-50) across the front drum with the sprockets ([25], see Fig. 3) on the rear drum [22], but fails to disclose wherein the front drum includes at least one cog spaced apart on the outer wall between the ends thereof.
Peters et al. discloses a similar platform header (see Fig. 2) comprising of a front drum [202] with at least one cog ([213], see Col. 3, lines 57-61) spaced apart on the outer wall (see outer wall of [202] in Figs. 2 and 4) between the ends thereof (see ends of [202] in Figs. 2 and 4), aligned with the belt ([210]; see Col. 3, lines 59-61) of the conveyor [200].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the sprockets mounted on the front drum of Van Overschelde et al. with the cogs mounted on the front drum of Peters et al. since both are mechanisms used to contact the protrusions on the belt of the conveyor to enable rotation of the belt about the drum, yielding the same predictable result; therefore, when the cogs of the front drum of Peters et al. is applied to the platform header of Van Overschelde et al., the cogs are laterally aligned across the front drum with the sprockets on the rear drum in order to keep the conveyor belt connected for rotation.
Regarding claim 8, Peters et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein each of the cogs [213] includes a plurality of projections (see Col. 3, lines 57-61 and Figs. 2 and 4) extending radially outward from and circumferentially around the outer wall of the from drum [202] for operatively engaging the conveyor [200].
Regarding claim 9, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the conveyor [29] includes at least one belt (conveyor [29] is a belt) operatively coupled between the sprockets [25 and 28] for driving the conveyor (see Col. 3, lines 45-50) and rotatably linking the front [28' and 36] and rear drums [22].
It can be seen then that when the sprockets mounted on the front drum of Van Overschelde et al. are replaced with the cogs mounted on the front drum of Peters et al. that the belt is coupled between the sprockets and cogs for driving the conveyor as disclosed by Van Overschelde et al. (see Col. 3, lines 45-50).
Regarding claim 10, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the belt (conveyor [29] is a belt) includes a plurality of inwardly extending projections (includes a plurality of teeth; therefore, are inwardly extending projections, see Col. 3, lines 47-50 and Fig. 6) adapted to mesh with the projections on the sprocket and the projections on the cogs of the front [28' and 36] and rear drums [22] to prevent relative movement between the belt and the front and rear drums.
Regarding claim 11, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses a plurality of slats ([35]; see Col. 3, lines 58-61) extending laterally across the conveyor [29] adapted to engage the cut crops received from the front drum [28' and 36] for transporting the crop across the rear portion [15] of the header frame (frame of [7], see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the rear portion [15] of the header frame (frame of [7], see Fig. 2) includes a planar ceiling [16] and a planar floor [17] horizontally spaced apart (see Fig. 1) and fixedly coupled between opposite sides [11 and 12] of the header frame defining an interior spaced (see below) therebetween.
PNG
media_image8.png
548
627
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the belt feeder assembly [101] is mounted in the interior space (see above; see Col. 2, line 67 and Col. 3, lines 1-2) between the ceiling [16] and floor [17].
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoenrock (US 2468501 A), Tan et al. (WO 2017150630 A1), Van Overschelde et al. (US 10149437 B2), and Peters et al. (US 10647516 B2) as applied to claims 7- 13 above, and further in view of conveyorbeltchn.com (https://conveyorbeltchn.com/how- to-calculate-conveyor-belt-tension/); hence forth ConveyorBelt.
Regarding claim 14, Van Overschelde et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the conveyor [29] includes a top run (see below) adjacent the ceiling [16] and a bottom run (see below) adjacent the floor [17], wherein a plurality of wear-resistant elements (tensioning system of elements [40-43], see Col. 4, lines 30-48; elements ensure longevity of the conveyor through maintaining the tension to a predefined value, therefore are wear-resistant elements) are coupled to the floor (coupled to the floor through arm [43], see Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image9.png
621
674
media_image9.png
Greyscale
But Van Overschelde et al. fails to explicitly disclose the elements are low friction elements that reduce friction between the bottom run of the conveyor and the floor.
However, ConveyorBelt discloses that tension controls the friction between the conveyor belt and drive roller, ensuring effective transmission of the driving force (see attached ConveyorBelt NPL).
It can be seen then that Van Overschelde et al.'s tensioning system is capable of reducing the friction between the bottom run of the conveyor and the floor as disclosed by ConveyorBelt (see attached ConveyorBelt NPL); therefore, the elements of Van Overschelde et al.'s tensioning system are low friction wear-resistant elements.
Response to Arguments
Please see updated art rejections above in response to applicant’s claim amendments, now including Schoenrock (US 2468501 A).
Applicant’s remarks pages 3 and 4 set forth “Van Overschelde et al. (and Tan et al.) does not address the problem of transferring cut crops to a combine without moving the crop laterally across the width of the header using the technical solution solved by the subject-matter of claim 1 of the belt feeder assembly and the cutting assembly having the same width as the reel.”
However, amended claim 1 fails to disclose limitations which encompass the cut crops not moving laterally across the width of the header, as well as, the belt feeder and cutting assemblies being the same width as the reel.
Specifically, claim 1, lines 12-14 set forth “a belt feeder assembly coupled to the header frame for receiving cut crops from the crop pick-up reel and transporting the cut crops across the rear portion of the header frame”. Previously applied art Tan et al. has a similar belt feeder assembly [20] that receives crop from the crop pick-up reel [8] due to the pick-up reel sweeping the crops backward. Despite the presence of the helical vane [26] serving to move crop material into the middle of the header, the pick-up reel still sweeps the crops backward for the belt feeder to receive. It can be seen then that the amended claim fails to specifically claim no lateral movement of the crop maternal.
Further, claim 1, lines 5-6 recite “a cutting assembly operatively coupled to the front portion between the opposite sides for cutting the crops to be harvested“, lines 10-11 recite “a crop pick-up reel rotatably coupled between the distal ends of the support arms for engaging the crops cut by the cutting assembly” and line 12 recites “a belt feeder assembly coupled to the header frame”. The above mentioned lines fail to explicitly disclose that the belt feeder and cutting assemblies are the same width as the reel. Therefore, Tan et al.’s belt feeder, cutting assembly, and pick-up reel meet the limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Despite Tan et al. still teaching the limitations of the amended claims, Schoenrock (US 2468501 A) is applied due to more explicitly teaching the problem as outlined by applicant above. Schoenrock has a similar platform header that only moves the cut crops rearwardly (see Fig. 2), as well as, the belt feeder [5] and cutting assembly [4] being the same width as the reel [6]. It can be seen then that when the belt feeder of Schoenrock is substituted with the belt feeder of Van Overschelde et al. that the combination of references discloses all limitations as set forth in claim 1.
It is for these reasons that the arguments are not persuasive, and the claims stand rejected.
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 SUNNY WEBB whose telephone number is (571)272-3830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 to 5:30 E.T..
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 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.
/SUNNY D WEBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights