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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 is allowed over the prior art.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, Palicki discloses a snow thrower with two motors to control the chute rotation and deflector angle. Friberg teaches locating drive mechanisms to control the chute rotation and deflector angle behind and above the chute. While these references have materially different drive mechanisms, they are still considered analogous to the claimed invention and each other. However, claim 1 now requires the two motors and their associated transmission mechanisms be disposed within the housing. This is not a configuration one of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious based on the teachings of the prior art. Palicki drives the chute rotation from the base of the chute and locating the chute rotation transmission mechanism to be fully within the motor housing at the top of the support rod would require too significant of a redesign and require improper hindsight reasoning. No other reference in the prior art discloses the now claimed configuration of motors and transmission mechanisms within the housing. The claim is allowable for these reasons.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/13/2026 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive.
It must be noted that the combination of Palicki and Friberg only relies upon Friberg for the teaching of locating the drive mechanisms on “an arm (58) directly behind the chute with the pivoting axis of the drive mechanism being directly over the chute rotation axis” (Non-Final Rejection dated 4/20/2026; pg 5, paragraph 5). Based on these teachings, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to locate the drive mechanisms of Palicki to be in a similar location.
The independent claims locate the drive mechanisms differently. Claim 1 locates the two motors and associated transmission mechanisms within the motor housing at the top of the support arm which is a distinction of the combination of Palicki and Friberg. Claim 18 does not locate the motors or transmission mechanisms. Claim 16 locates only the two motors within the motor housing at the top of the support arm. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to locate at least the two motors of Palicki within the motor housing at the top of the support arm based on the teachings of Friberg. Therefore, claims 16-17 are still rejected in view of Palicki and Friberg and claims 18-20 are still rejected in view of Palicki.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of foreign applications retrieved 4/22/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a support rod connected at upper end to the motor housing” in lines 15-16 should be amended to read –a support rod connected at its upper end to the motor housing--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 18 recites “ a running process” in line 12 which is not adequately described in the specification. The only place “a running process” is mentioned is para [0161] of the specification the language of which is recited verbatim in the claim. It is not clear to the examiner how the constant speed of the first motor during the “running process” is different from the constant speed of the first motor as controlled by the first controller (stated in lines 9-11 of claim 18). Based on the specification and drawings, it is not clear what the claimed “running process” entails. It is not clear to the examiner if this “running process” is part of the claimed invention. The claim fails to comply with the written description requirement for the “running process” for these reasons.
Claim 18 is 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 18 introduces a first “constant speed” in line 10 and a second “constant speed” in line 12 and then references “the constant speed” also in line 12. It is unclear to which “constant speed” this limitation is referring and if the “constant speeds” are supposed to be the same or different. The claim is rendered indefinite for this reason. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the claim has been examined as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palicki et al. (US 9903079).
Regarding claim 18, Palicki discloses a snow blower, comprising:
a body (12); and
an operation assembly connected to the body and comprising at least an operation member (30);
wherein the body comprises a snow throwing member, a deflector connected to the snow throwing member and disposed on the snow throwing member (snow throwing member 16; deflector 18), a first motor configured to drive the snow throwing member to rotate relative to the body about a first axis, a second motor configured to drive the deflector to rotate relative to the snow throwing member about a second axis (first motor 26 drives the snow throwing member about axis 15; second motor 24 drives deflector about axis 19), and a first controller electrically connected to at least the first motor and configured to control the first motor to run, and the first controller is configured to control, based on a state of the operation member, the first motor to run to drive the snow throwing member to rotate at a constant speed relative to the body about the first axis (controller 52 controls the motors based on the state of chute control 38; col 4, lines 29-31; col 7, lines 1-7); and
wherein the first motor runs at a constant speed in a running process and the constant speed is independent of the rotational speed of the operation member (the first motor already runs at a constant speed in a running process that is independent of the rotation of operation member 30/38; roller 52 controls the motors based on the state of chute control 38; col 4, lines 29-31; col 7, lines 1-7).
Regarding claim 19, Palicki discloses the snow blower further comprising a second controller electrically connected to at least the second motor and configured to control the second motor to run, wherein the second controller is configured to, after the second motor is started, control the second motor to run at a constant speed to drive the deflector to rotate relative to the snow throwing member about the second axis (Palicki; col 7, lines 1-7).
Regarding claim 20, Palicki discloses the snow blower wherein the operation member is provided with a handle, and a user is capable of operating the handle to rotate in a front and rear direction and a left and right direction so as to control the snow throwing member to rotate about the first axis in the left and right direction and the deflector to rotate about the second axis in an up and down direction (Palicki; col 3, lines 58-64).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palicki in further view of Friberg et al. (US 20040255493).
Regarding claim 16, Palicki discloses a snow blower, comprising:
a body (12); and
an operation assembly connected to the body and configured to allow an operator to guide and control the snow blower (30);
wherein the body comprises a snow throwing system, the snow throwing system comprises a snow throwing member, a deflector connected to the snow throwing member and disposed on the snow throwing member (snow throwing member 16; deflector 18), a first motor configured to drive the snow throwing member to rotate relative to the body about a first axis, a second motor configured to drive the deflector to rotate relative to the snow throwing member about a second axis (first motor 26 drives the snow throwing member about axis 15; second motor 24 drives deflector about axis 19).
Palicki is silent on the first and second motor disposed on a support rod and within the motor housing as claimed.
However, Friberg discloses a similar snow thrower chute and deflector control (Figs 1-3) and teaches the drive mechanisms for the chute and deflector being next to each other on an arm (58) directly behind the chute with the pivoting axis of the drive mechanism being directly over the chute rotation axis (Fig 8). Friberg further teaches a cover 68 disposed at the upper end of arm 58 with the drive mechanisms disposed within the housing as depicted in Fig 2.
Palicki and Friberg are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of snow blowers with chute and deflector control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Palicki to incorporate the teachings of Friberg and located the drive mechanisms for the chute and deflector on an arm directly behind the chute with the pivoting axis of the drive mechanism being directly over the chute rotation axis. One would have made this modification to make adjusting the chute quicker and easier (Friberg; para [0036], lines 7-12).
The support arm (Friberg’s Fig 7; 58) is considered to have a lower end connected to a snow removal housing, an upper end of the support rod supports a first motor, and the first motor and the second motor are each disposed at the upper end of the support rod (the motors of the combination are considered to be disposed on the upper end of the support arm within the housing).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Palicki and Friberg discloses the snow blower wherein the support rod comprises a first rod portion and a second rod portion which constitute a detachable connection, and the first rod portion and the second rod portion are detachable so that the snow throwing system is relatively detachable (claim language is broad; Friberg Fig 7 depicts the first and second rod portions which are depicted with removal fasteners to make the detachable connection between the snow throwing system and the snow removal housing).
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 BLAKE SCOVILLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30-6 (ET).
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at (571) 272-0547. 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.
/BLAKE E SCOVILLE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
