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 § 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the fifth rotation" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-4, 12, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colistro (US005113640A), hereinafter Colistro in view of Isbill (US 2014/0102737 A1), hereinafter Isbill in view of Yoshida et al. (US 2014/0147197 A1), hereinafter Yoshida.
Regarding claim 1, Colistro discloses an adjustable link (88+86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) for a flex wing cutter (10), comprising:
a first end portion (88 adjacent to 70 in fig. 1, hereinafter 88A, col. 2 lines 44-55);
a second end portion (88 adjacent to 90 in fig. 1, hereinafter 88B, col. 2 lines 44-55);
a shaft (86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) extending between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) and selectively repositionable relative to the first end portion to adjust a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 55-57);
Colistro teaches the above, but fails to explicitly disclose a first end portion providing first rotation about a first pin of the first end portion and second rotation about a second pin of the first end portion.
Isbill teaches a similar device in the same field of vegetation cutters wherein a first end portion (42, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 42A) providing first rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a first pin (78, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 78A) of the first end portion (fig. 4) and second rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a second pin (76, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 76A) of the first end portion (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substituted the universal joint 88A of Colistro with the connection joint 42 of Isbill to yield the predictable result of providing various position of the cutter ([0033] of Isbill). This modification of Colistro will result in meeting the claimed specific sub-limitations of the first end portion of this claim.
Further regarding claim 1, Colistro teaches the above, but fails to explicitly disclose a second end portion providing third rotation about a third pin of the second end portion and fourth rotation about a fourth pin of the second end portion.
Isbill teaches a similar device in the same field of vegetation cutters wherein a second end portion (42, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 42B) providing third rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a third pin (76B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 76B) of the second end portion (fig. 4) and fourth rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a fourth pin (78, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 78B) of the second end portion (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substituted the universal joints 88B of Colistro with the connection joint 42 of Isbill to yield the predictable result of providing various position of the cutter ([0033] of Isbill). This modification of Colistro will result in meeting the claimed specific sub-limitations of the second end portion of this claim.
Further regarding claim 1, Colistro in view of Isbill teaches the above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the second end portion is configured to rotate about the shaft to provide a fifth rotation without adjusting the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion.
Yoshida teaches a similar device in the same field of connection joints of vehicles wherein the second end portion (6, fig. 2-4, [0035]) is configured to rotate about the shaft to provide a fifth rotation (35, fig. 2-4, [0035-0041]) without adjusting the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion (there is no discussion of distance adjustment in combination with this rotation, [0035-0041]).
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 the shaft and second end connection with to allow for rotation of the second end portion about the shaft of Yoshida in order to allow for rotational adjustments as needed ([0010 and 0035-0041] of Yoshida).
Regarding claim 2, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches, wherein:
the first end portion (42A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) comprises:
the first pin (78A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill);
a first body (68, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill, hereinafter 68A) coupled to the first pin (fig. 4 and 6 of Isbill), the first body rotatable about the first pin to provide the first rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038] of Isbill);
the second pin (76A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) coupled to the first body (68A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) and rotatable relative to the first body to provide the second rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038] of Isbill); and
a second body (72+74, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill, hereinafter 72A+74A) coupled to the second pin (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) such that the second body rotates with the second pin (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill); and
the second end portion (42B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033]) comprises:
a receiving piece (49, fig. 3 and 4, [0036] of Yoshida; see also where 70 meets 68 of Isbill; see also where 86 meets 88, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55 of Colistro) coupled to the shaft (35, fig. 2-4, [0035-0041] of Yoshida; see also 70, fig. 6, [0033] of Isbill; see also 86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55 of Colistro);
a third body (68, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill, hereinafter 68B) coupled to the receiving piece (fig. 3 and 4 of Yoshida) and rotatable about the receiving piece to provide the fifth rotation (fig. 2-4, [0035-0041] of Yoshida);
the third pin (78B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) coupled to the third body (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill);
a fourth body (72+74, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill, hereinafter 72B+74B) coupled to the third pin (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) and rotatable about the third to provide the third rotation pin (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill), the third body configured to rotate with the third pin relative to the fourth body (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill)); and
the fourth pin (76B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) coupled to the fourth body (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill), wherein the fourth pin is rotatable about the fourth body to provide the fourth rotation (fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill).
Regarding claim 3, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches, wherein a portion of the second body (72A+74A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) straddles a portion of the first body (68A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill, wherein 68A connects to 74A).
Regarding claim 4, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches, wherein a portion of the third body (68B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) straddles a portion of the fourth body (72B+74B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill, wherein 68B connects to 74B).
Regarding claim 12, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches, wherein the receiving piece and the shaft are permanently coupled and rotate together (fig. 2-4, [0035-0041] of Yoshida).
Regarding claim 15, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches, wherein the first pin (78A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) is orthogonal to the second pin (76A, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) and the second pin is orthogonal to the shaft (fig. 4 and 6 of Isbill).
Regarding claim 16, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches, wherein the third pin (76B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) is orthogonal to the fourth pin (fig. 4 and 6 of Isbill) and the third pin (78B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) is orthogonal to the shaft (fig. 4 and 6 of Isbill).
Regarding claim 17, Colistro discloses a cutter (10, fig. 1, lines 63-68) comprising:
an adjustable link (88+86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) comprising:
a first end portion (88 adjacent to 70 in fig. 1, hereinafter 88A, col. 2 lines 44-55),
a second end portion (88 adjacent to 90 in fig. 1, hereinafter 88B, col. 2 lines 44-55), and
a shaft (86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) extending between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) and selectively repositionable relative to the first end portion to adjust a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 55-57); and
a wing (16, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68).
Colistro teaches the above, but fails to explicitly disclose a first end portion providing first rotation about a first pin of the first end portion and second rotation about a second pin of the first end portion.
Isbill teaches a similar device in the same field of vegetation cutters wherein a first end portion (42, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 42A) providing first rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a first pin (78, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 78A) of the first end portion (fig. 4) and second rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a second pin (76, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 76A) of the first end portion (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substitute the universal joints 88A of Colistro with the connection 42 of Isbill to yield the predictable result of providing various position of the cutter ([0033] of Isbill). This modification of Colistro will result in meeting the claimed specific sub-limitations of the first end portion of this claim.
Further regarding claim 17, Colistro teaches the above, but fails to explicitly disclose a second end portion providing third rotation about a third pin of the second end portion and fourth rotation about a fourth pin of the second end portion.
Isbill teaches a similar device in the same field of vegetation cutters wherein a second end portion (42, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 42B) providing third rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a third pin (76B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 76B) of the second end portion (fig. 4) and fourth rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a fourth pin (78, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 78B) of the second end portion (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substituted the universal joints 88B of Colistro with the connection joint 42 of Isbill to yield the predictable result of providing various position of the cutter ([0033] of Isbill). This modification of Colistro will result in meeting the claimed specific sub-limitations of the second end portion of this claim.
With this, the wing (16, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68 of Colistro) utilizes the first rotation, the second rotation, the third rotation, the fourth rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038] of Isbill).
Further regarding claim 17, Colistro in view of Isbill teaches the above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the second end portion is configured to rotate about the shaft to provide a fifth rotation without adjusting the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion.
Yoshida teaches a similar device in the same field of connection joints of vehicles wherein the second end portion (6, fig. 2-4, [0035]) is configured to rotate about the shaft to provide a fifth rotation (35, fig. 2-4, [0035-0041]) without adjusting the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion (there is no discussion of distance adjustment in combination with this rotation, [0035-0041]).
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 the shaft and second end connection with to allow for rotation of the second end portion about the shaft of Yoshida in order to allow for rotational adjustments as needed ([0010 and 0035-0041] of Yoshida).
With this, the wing (16, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68 of Colistro) utilizes the fifth rotation (35, fig. 2-4, [0035-0041 of Yoshida).
Regarding claim 18, Colistro discloses a cutter (10, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68) comprising:
a chassis (12, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68);
a first connection piece coupled to the chassis (70, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-57);
an adjustable link (88+86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) comprising:
a first end portion (88 adjacent to 70 in fig. 1, hereinafter 88A, col. 2 lines 44-55),
a second end portion (88 adjacent to 90 in fig. 1, hereinafter 88B, col. 2 lines 44-55), and
a shaft (86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) extending between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55) and selectively repositionable relative to the first end portion to adjust a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 55-57);
a second connection piece (90, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-57) coupled to the second end portion (fig. 1);
a wing (16, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68) coupled to the second connection piece (fig. 1).
Colistro teaches the above, but fails to explicitly disclose a first end portion providing first rotation about a first pin of the first end portion and second rotation about a second pin of the first end portion.
Isbill teaches a similar device in the same field of vegetation cutters wherein a first end portion (42, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 42A) providing first rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a first pin (78, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 78A) of the first end portion (fig. 4) and second rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a second pin (76, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 76A) of the first end portion (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substitute the universal joints 88A of Colistro with the connection 42 of Isbill to yield the predictable result of providing various position of the cutter ([0033] of Isbill). This modification of Colistro will result in meeting the claimed specific sub-limitations of the first end portion of this claim.
Further regarding claim 18, Colistro teaches the above, but fails to explicitly disclose a second end portion providing third rotation about a third pin of the second end portion and fourth rotation about a fourth pin of the second end portion.
Isbill teaches a similar device in the same field of vegetation cutters wherein a second end portion (42, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 42B) providing third rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a third pin (76B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 76B) of the second end portion (fig. 4) and fourth rotation (fig. 3, 4, and 6, [0033 and 0037-0038]) about a fourth pin (78, fig. 4 and 6, [0033], hereinafter 78B) of the second end portion (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substituted the universal joints 88B of Colistro with the connection joint 42 of Isbill to yield the predictable result of providing various position of the cutter ([0033] of Isbill). This modification of Colistro will result in meeting the claimed specific sub-limitations of the second end portion of this claim.
Further regarding claim 18, Colistro in view of Isbill teaches the above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the second end portion is configured to rotate about the shaft to provide a fifth rotation without adjusting the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion.
Yoshida teaches a similar device in the same field of connection joints of vehicles wherein the second end portion (6, fig. 2-4, [0035]) is configured to rotate about the shaft to provide a fifth rotation (35, fig. 2-4, [0035-0041]) without adjusting the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion (there is no discussion of distance adjustment in combination with this rotation, [0035-0041]).
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 the shaft and second end connection with to allow for rotation of the second end portion about the shaft of Yoshida in order to allow for rotational adjustments as needed ([0010 and 0035-0041] of Yoshida).
Further regarding claim 20, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida teaches wherein the adjustable link (88+86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55 of Colistro) is a first adjustable link (fig. 1 of Colistro) and the wing (16, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68 of Colistro) is a first wing, further comprising:
a second wing (14, fig. 1, col. 1 lines 63-68 of Colistro); and
a second adjustable link (82+80, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55 of Colistro), wherein the first adjustable link and the second adjustable link extend over the chassis (fig. 1 of Colistro).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colistro (US005113640A), hereinafter Colistro in view of Isbill (US 2014/0102737 A1), hereinafter Isbill in view of Yoshida et al. (US 2014/0147197 A1), hereinafter Yoshida in view of Oka et al. (US 6,270,418 B1), hereinafter Oka.
Regarding claim 10, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches the third body (68B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) and the receiving piece (49, fig. 3 and 4, [0036] of Yoshida) and the shaft (86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55 of Colistro), but fails to explicitly disclose a bearing coupled between the third body and the receiving piece, the bearing parallel to the shaft.
Oka teaches a similar device in the same field of connection joints in vehicles wherein a bearing (10+11, fig. 2 and 4, col. 6 lines 53-67) coupled between the third body (4, fig. 2 and 4, col. 6 lines 28-67) and the receiving piece (area between 4, fig. 2 and 4, col. 6 lines 28-67), the bearing parallel to the shaft (2, fig. 2 and 4, col. 6 lines 28-67).
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 Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida to incorporate the bearing of Oka in order to provide vibration mitigation ([0033]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colistro (US005113640A), hereinafter Colistro in view of Isbill (US 2014/0102737 A1), hereinafter Isbill in view of Yoshida et al. (US 2014/0147197 A1), hereinafter Yoshida in view of Loughrin et al. (US 2003/0045366 A1), hereinafter Loughrin.
Regarding claim 13, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida further teaches the third body (68B, fig. 4 and 6, [0033] of Isbill) and the receiving piece (49, fig. 3 and 4, [0036] of Yoshida) and the shaft (86, fig. 1, col. 2 lines 44-55 of Colistro), but fails to explicitly disclose a thrust washer coupled between the third body and the receiving piece, the thrust washer perpendicular to the shaft
Loughrin teaches a similar device in the same field of agricultural implements wherein a thrust washer (48, fig. 7, [0030]) coupled between the body (6/9, fig. 1 and 7, [0022 and 0024]) and the receiving piece (opening of 6/9 that 16/17 goes into, fig. 1 and 7, [0030]), the thrust washer perpendicular to the shaft (16/17, fig. 1 and 7).
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 Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida to incorporate the thrust washer of Loughrin in order to maintain the body/ yoke in position relative to the shaft ([0033]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9, 11, 14, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 5-9, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida is considered the closest prior art, but fails to explicitly teach grease point on a pin when taken the other limitations of the claims. While the use of grease as a lubricant is known, no prior art was found that teaches the use on a pin when taken the other limitations of the claims.
Regarding claim 11, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida is considered the closest prior art, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the bearing include holes and dimples configured to receive grease, when taken in combination with the other limitations of the claim. There is no obvious reason to have the bearing include holes and dimples configured to receive grease without undo hindsight.
Regarding claim 14, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida is considered the closest prior art, but fails to explicitly teach a washer coupled to the second body and the shaft, and a nut coupled to the shaft and the washer, when taken in combination with the other limitations of the claim. There is no obvious reason to have both a washer and a nut in coupled to the second body and the shaft without undo hindsight.
Regarding claim 19, Colistro in view of Isbill and Yoshida is considered the closest prior art, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the adjustable link does not extend over the wing. In combination with the other limitations of the claim there is no obvious way to modify Colistro to include the adjustable link not extending over the wing without destroying the function of the invention of Colistro.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cartner (4,495,754) – wing mower with a shaft and maneuverable connection joint, but does not appear to have all the elements required by the independent claims.
Klaeger (5,146,733) - wing mower with a shaft and maneuverable connection joint, but does not appear to have all the elements required by the independent claims.
Reed et al. (US 2022/0403893 A1) – a multi part and maneuverable joint, but does not appear to have a traditional second pin.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer A Railey whose telephone number is (571)270-7353. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-4).
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/JENNIFER A RAILEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/Nicole Coy/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights