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 16 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16, line 1, “approaches” appears to be a typo, and is to be deleted.
Claim 17, line 1, “approaches” appears to be a typo, and is to be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 14-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by IACO (NPL Document Cite No. 2), hereinafter “IACO”.
As to claim 1 and with respect to the following annotated figure, IACO discloses a row assembly configured to be supported on a pipe of an irrigator, the pipe having an outlet, the row assembly comprising: a clamp assembly configured to be removably mounted to the pipe; a transversely extending first support having a proximal end and a distal end, said proximal end being attached to said clamp assembly; and a first hose support supported closer to said distal end than said proximal end of said first support, said first hose support configured to at least partly support at least a portion of a first hose.
PNG
media_image1.png
642
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 2, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 1, further comprising: a fitting configured to be fluidly coupled to the outlet; a first hose having a proximal end, an intermediate portion and a distal end, said first hose being fluidly coupled to said fitting at said proximal end, said first hose being at least partly supported at said intermediate portion on said first hose support; and a valve, said valve being at least partly supported on said distal end of said first hose. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
As to claim 3, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 1, further comprising: a transversely extending second support having a proximal end and a distal end, said proximal end being attached to said clamp assembly; and a second hose support supported closer to said distal end than said proximal end of said second support, said second hose support configured to at least partly support at least a portion of a second hose. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
Also, refer to page 2 of the IACO publication, (“Dry Wheel Track Solution”), which shows the row assembly of the irrigator and corresponding transverse second supports.
As to claim 4 and with respect to the following annotated figure, IACO discloses an irrigator, comprising: a pipe having an outlet; and a row assembly removably supported on said pipe, said row assembly comprising: a clamp assembly configured to be removably mounted to the pipe; a transversely extending first support having a proximal end and a distal end, said proximal end being attached to said clamp assembly; and a first hose support supported closer to said distal end than said proximal end of said first support, said first hose support configured to at least partly support at least a portion of a hose.
PNG
media_image1.png
642
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 5, IACO discloses the irrigator of claim 4, wherein the row assembly further comprises: a fitting fluidly coupled to said outlet; a first hose having a proximal end, an intermediate portion and a distal end, said first hose being fluidly coupled to said fitting at said proximal end, said first hose being at least partly supported at said intermediate portion on said first hose support; and a valve, said valve being at least partly supported on said distal end of said first hose. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
As to claim 6, IACO discloses the irrigator of claim 4, wherein the row assembly further comprises: a transversely extending second support having a proximal end and a distal end, said proximal end being attached to said clamp assembly; and a second hose support supported closer to said distal end than said proximal end of said second support, said second hose support configured to at least partly support at least a portion of a hose. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
Also, refer to page 2 of the IACO publication, (“Dry Wheel Track Solution”), which shows the row assembly of the irrigator and corresponding transverse second supports.
As to claim 7 and with respect to the following annotated figure, IACO discloses a row assembly configured to be supported on a pipe of an irrigator, the pipe having an outlet, the row assembly comprising: a clamp assembly configured to be removably mounted to the pipe; a transversely extending first support having a proximal end and a distal end, said proximal end being attached to said clamp assembly; a first hose support, said first hose support configured to at least partly support at least a portion of a hose; and a fitting configured to be fluidly coupled to the outlet; and a first hose having a proximal end, an intermediate portion and a distal end, said first hose being fluidly coupled to said fitting at said proximal end, said first hose being at least partly supported at said intermediate portion on said first hose support; and a valve, said valve being disposed at said distal end of said first hose.
PNG
media_image1.png
642
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 8, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, further comprising: a transversely extending second support having a proximal end and a distal end, said proximal end being attached to said clamp assembly; and a second hose support supported closer to said distal end than said proximal end of said second support, said second hose support configured to at least partly support at least a portion of a hose. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
Also, refer to page 2 of the IACO publication, (“Dry Wheel Track Solution”), which shows the row assembly of the irrigator and corresponding transverse second supports.
As to claim 9, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, further comprising: a transversely extending second support having a proximal end and a distal end, said proximal end being attached to said clamp assembly; and a second hose support supported closer to said distal end than said proximal end of said second support, said second hose support configured to at least partly support at least a portion of a second hose. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
Also, refer to page 2 of the IACO publication, (“Dry Wheel Track Solution”), which shows the row assembly of the irrigator and corresponding transverse second supports.
As to claim 14, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, wherein said first hose approaches said first hose support along a direction that is at or below horizontal. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure. Also, refer to page 2 of the IACO publication, (“Dry Wheel Track Solution”).
As to claim 15, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, wherein said first hose approaches said first hose support in a direction along an acute angle below horizontal. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure. Also, refer to page 2 of the IACO publication, (“Dry Wheel Track Solution”).
As to claim 16, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 15, wherein said first hose
As to claim 17, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, wherein said first hose
As to claim 19, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, wherein said first hose support positively clamps said first hose. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
As to claim 20, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, wherein said first support comprises a bracket. Refer to the foregoing annotated figure.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IACO, alone.
As to claim 10, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, yet is not explicit as to whether said first hose support is at least partially made of a plastic material, and wherein said first support is at least partially made of metal.
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the IACO first hose support at least partially of a plastic material, and the first support at least partially of metal, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IACO in view of Mitchell et al (US 2015/0377386).
As to claim 11, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, except that said first hose support is configured to releasably secure a portion of said hose.
As to claim 12, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 11, except that said first hose support comprises a releasable clamp.
As to claim 13, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, except for further comprising: a first pin mounted to said first support at a distal end of said first support, wherein said first hose support is mounted to said first pin.
However, Mitchell et al teaches am adjustable bracket and hub for a flexible hose support, comprising a first hose support in the form of a releasable clamp (FIG. 8) that employs fasteners and pins to pivotably and releasably secure a drop hose to an above support (FIG. 9).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the clamp of IACO, with a releasable clamp as taught by Mitchell et al, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to permit adjustment and easy release and installation of the drop hose.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IACO in view of the Komet Publication (NPL Document Cite No. 1), hereinafter “Komet”.
As to claim 18, IACO discloses the row assembly of claim 7, except the said first hose support does not positively clamp said first hose.
However, Komet teaches a truss rod clip that does not positively clamp a drop hose to a support, which allows for easy assembly and disassembly while also reliably securing the drop hose to the support structure.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the clamp of IACO, with a releasable clamp as taught by Komet, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to permit easy assembly and disassembly while also reliably securing the drop hose to the support structure.
Examiner’s Note:
The italicized portions in the foregoing claims are functional recitations. These clauses, as well as other statements of intended use do not serve to patently distinguish the claimed structure over that of the reference(s), as long as the structure of the cited reference(s) is capable of performing the intended use. See MPEP 2111-2115.
See also MPEP 2114, which states:
A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647;
Claims directed to apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531; and
[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525,1528.
Any one of the systems in the cited reference(s) is capable of being used in the same manner and for the intended or desired use as the claimed invention. Note that it is sufficient to show that said capability exists, which is the case for the cited reference(s).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Druffel, Goodman, Schlenker and Scott each discloses a device relevant to Applicant’s claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James M Hewitt II whose telephone number is (571)272-7084. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-930pm, mid-day flex 2-4pm.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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.
James M. Hewitt II
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3679
/JAMES M HEWITT II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679