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 Objections
Claims 1, 3-4, and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 12 recites “a drive system for mounted”, should read – a drive system mounted –.
Claim 3, line 2 recites “coupled to the opposite side of the header frame”, should read – coupled to the opposite sides of the header frame –.
Claim 4, line 1 recites “wherein the shaft”, should read – wherein the fixed shaft – for clarity.
Claim 8, line 3 recites “from drum”, should read – front drum –.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Van Overschelde et al. (US 10149437 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Van Overschelde et al. teaches a platform header [1] for harvesting agricultural crops in a field comprising:
a header frame (frame of [7], see Fig. 2) extending between a front portion [14] and opposite rear portion [15] and laterally between opposite sides [11 and 12];
a cutting assembly ([2 and 3]; see Col. 2, lines 52-56) operatively coupled to the front portion (while not explicitly shown, coupled to the front portion to transport the crops into the body of the combine, see Col. 3, lines 6-11) for cutting the crops to be harvested;
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 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_image1.png
526
501
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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. teaches wherein the front drum [28’ and 36] includes opposite ends (see below) defining a central rotational axis [27] therebetween and is 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_image2.png
706
775
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Van Overschelde et al. teaches 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_image3.png
706
775
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Van Overschelde et al. teaches wherein the 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] for 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_image4.png
526
501
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Van Overschelde et al. teaches 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 shaft (see above).
PNG
media_image5.png
526
501
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Van Overschelde et al. teaches wherein the rear drum [22] includes at least one sprocket [25] fixedly coupled thereto (see Col. 3, lines 32-34) and spaced lateral 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 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) 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Overschelde et al. (US 10149437 B2) 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_image6.png
554
678
media_image6.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 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_image7.png
706
775
media_image7.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.
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Overschelde et al. (US 10149437 B2), Peters et al. (US 10647516 B2), and conveyorbeltchn.com (https://conveyorbeltchn.com/how-to-calculate-conveyor-belt-tension/); hence forth ConveyorBelt as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Tan et al. (WO 2017150630 A1).
Regarding claim 15, the above combination discloses the platform header as applied, but 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 and a crop pick-up reel rotatably coupled between the distal ends of the support arms for engaging the cut crops from the cutting assembly.
Tan et al. discloses a similar platform header (see Fig. 1) comprising of 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) and a crop pick-up reel [8] rotatably coupled between the distal ends of the support arms for engaging the cut crops from the cutting assembly [17].
PNG
media_image8.png
516
755
media_image8.png
Greyscale
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 support arms and pick-up reel of Tan et al. on the platform header of Van Overschelde et al. and Peters et al. in order to scrape the planted crops backwards and into the body of the harvester (see Tan et al. paragraph [043], lines 6-7).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892 for the full list of references.
Reference US 4271660 A discloses a similar platform header (see Fig. 2) comprising of a front drum [74] with a plurality of fingers [101].
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
/JOSEPH M ROCCA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671