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
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5, line 3 reads “closer the” and should read –closer to the—
the claims use both “the” and “said,” only one of the terms should be used consistently throughout all claims
throughout the claims, the terms “one end side of the upper wall section” and “the another end side of the upper wall section” are abbreviated to “one end side” and “the another end side”, respectively. One of each of the terms should be used consistently in all claims
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 reads “each of the three or more cutter blades rotates in a direction from the one end side toward the another end side” in lines 14-15. However, from fig. 3, the blades appear to rotate about stationary axes and all rotate in a counter clockwise direction. It is not understood how the blades themselves can rotate from one side of the mower deck to the other, as any motion of the blade that could be interpreted to move from one side to another, such as the rotation of the blade during half of one complete revolution about its axis, would inherently have an opposite motion. For examination purposes, the limitation is interpreted to mean that the blades rotate in the same rotational direction. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-13 are rejected as they depend upon claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5, 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mullet (US 4226074 A).
Regarding claim 1, Mullet discloses a mower comprising:
a plurality of wheels (8);
three or more cutter blades (22) that cut turfgrass; and
a blade accommodating section (2) that accommodates the cutter blades, wherein
the blade accommodating section includes an upper wall section (4) and a peripheral wall section (6) extending downward from an outer peripheral edge of the upper wall section (4), and
the three or more cutter blades (22, see fig. 3) are accommodated side by side, in a left-right direction relative to a traveling direction of the mower, inside the peripheral wall section from one end side of the upper wall section to another end side of the upper wall section,
each of the three or more cutter blades rotates in a direction from the one end side toward the another end side,
a partition member (one of 74/46) is provided between two cutter blades of said three or more cutter blades accommodated in the one end side, and the partition member is not provided between two cutter blades accommodated in another end side (see fig. 3, 74 is positioned between the center and right blades 22, 74 is not positioned between center and left blades 22, 76 is positioned between center and left blades 22, 76 is not positioned between center and right blades 22; col. 5 lines 19-21),
the peripheral wall section is formed in an annular shape by a front-half peripheral wall (6a) and a rear-half peripheral wall (68),
the front-half peripheral wall is formed forward of rotation paths of the three or more cutter blades to be spaced apart from the rotation paths (44) of the three or more cutter blades by predetermined intervals in the traveling direction of the mower, and forms a grass dropping space in front of the mower in the traveling direction (see fig. 3, paths 44 are spaced from front wall 6a).
Regarding claim 5, Mullet discloses the mower according to claim 1, wherein, relative to the two cutter blades of the three or more cutter blades, the partition member (76) is disposed near the cutter blade located in the other end side out of the two cutter blades accommodated in the one end side (see fig. 3, 76 is positioned closer to center blade 22 in solid lines).
Regarding claim 8, Mullet discloses the mower according to claim 1, further comprising an auxiliary partition member (the other of 74/76) between the two cutter blades in the other end side, said auxiliary partition member being disposed so as not to overlap rotation paths of the three or more cutter blades (see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Mullet discloses the mower according to claim 8, wherein a rear end part of the auxiliary partition member (76) is located forward of a rotation center (26) of at least one of the three or more cutter blades (center cutter blade 22, see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Mullet discloses the mower according to claim 8, wherein
an upper edge part of the auxiliary partition member (74/76) is fixed to a lower surface of the upper wall section of the blade accommodating section (via shaft 80),
a front end part of the auxiliary partition member is fixed to a wall surface (6a) of the peripheral wall section of the blade accommodating section (see fig. 3, col.4 lines 56-63), and
a rear end part of the auxiliary partition member is not fixed to the peripheral wall section of the blade accommodating section (see fig. 3, 78/80 is spaced from the rear wall of 2).
Regarding claim 11, Mullet discloses the mower according to claim 8, wherein
the auxiliary partition member (74/76) is located within the grass dropping space (see fig. 3, 76 can be rotated into the grass dropping space as shown in dashed lines).
Regarding claim 12, Mullet discloses the mower according to claim 1, wherein each of the three or more cutter blades includes a wing section (24) that generates an updraft (col. 3 lines 6-13).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 6-7, 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The remarks argue that in Mullet (US 4226074 A), the mower deck discharges grass from the side, and that claim 1 requires “the direction of cut grass discharge is forward in the direction of travel of the lawnmower.” However, claim 1 does not requires that the grass be discharged forwardly of the mower deck. Instead, the claim requires that a grass dropping space be formed in front of the mower in the traveling direction. The claim does not require that the grass be discharged onto the ground onto the ground. Fig. 3 of Mullet shows that the front of the mower deck is spaced from the orbital paths 44 of the mower blades, thereby forming a space in front of the mower deck. As detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, the space is considered by the examiner to be a grass dropping space, as cut grass is moved from the cutting areas and into the space by the blades as it is cut. The claim does not require a limitation that the grass move from the space and directly onto the ground from the space that preclude the examiner’s interpretation of Mullet.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection using Samejima (US 6877302 B2) have been fully considered and are persuasive; the rejection has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE RUNCO whose telephone number is (469)295-9123. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Rocca can be reached at 5712728971. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MADELINE I RUNCO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights