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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, it appears “at the fan” should be changed to –as the fan—. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “a first end portion” should be changed to –the first end portion—since this has already been set forth in independent claim 16, line 10, from which claim 17 depends. . 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)(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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Archibald WO 0032026 A1.
Independent Claim 1: Archibald discloses an extractor (10) configured to separate debris from a crop and expel the debris therefrom, the extractor comprising:
a hood (16);
a fan assembly (18, 20, 24) positioned at least partially (at least shaft 24) within the hood and configured to generate a suction force to force the debris through the extractor, the fan assembly including a fan blade (blades of 18, 20); and
a support system (26, 30, 32) operably coupled with the fan assembly and configured to alter a position of the fan blade relative to an upper portion of the hood (see the boxed text of page 5 of the attached document which describes the spacing of the fans 18, 20 as being adjustable between 25 and 250mm which would alter the position of their fan blades relative to an upper portion of the hood), as per claim 1.
Dependent Claim 2: Archibald further discloses wherein the extractor (10) further comprises:
a barrel (14) operably coupled with the hood (16), the barrel and the hood defining, in combination, an airflow channel, as per claim 2.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-11, 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yasuhiko et al. CN 109475086 A.
Independent Claim 1: Yasuhiko discloses an extractor (7, Fig. 11) configured to separate debris from a crop and expel the debris therefrom, the extractor comprising:
a hood (55);
a fan assembly (50) positioned at least partially within the hood (Fig. 11) and configured to generate a suction force to force the debris through the extractor, the fan assembly including a fan blade (unnumbered, seen in the figures); and
a support system (56, 66) operably coupled with the fan assembly and configured to alter a position of the fan blade relative to an upper portion of the hood (via swinging movement actuated by actuator 65, the upper position of the hood, as it swings, will be altered relative to the fan blade), as per claim 1.
Dependent Claims 2, 4, 6-11: Yasuhiko further discloses wherein the extractor (7) further comprises:
a barrel (53) operably coupled with the hood (55), the barrel and the hood defining, in combination, an airflow channel (see Fig. 11), as per claim 2;
wherein the support system (56, 66) comprises:
one or more brackets (59, as numbered in Fig. 11) operably coupled with the barrel (53); and
one or more arms (57) operably coupled with the one or more brackets (as seen in Fig. 11), as per claim 4;
wherein the support system (56, 66) further comprises:
a first arm (57) and a second arm (another of 57), wherein the first arm and the second arm each extend vertically above the hood (55, as seen in Fig. 11), as per claim 6;
wherein the first arm (57) has a first end portion (the bottom portion) operably coupled with a first bracket (59, as numbered in Fig. 11) and a second end portion (the top portion) operably coupled to a common unit (58), and wherein the second arm (another 57) has a first end portion (the bottom portion) operably coupled with a second bracket (another of 59) and a second end portion (the top portion) operably coupled to the common unit, as per claim 7;
wherein the support system (56, 66) further comprises:
an actuator (65) operably coupled with a first end portion (the bottom portion) of the first arm (57), wherein the actuator is configured to alter a position of the common unit (58, which remains stationary) relative to the hood (55, which swings/rotates about vertical axis Y1), as per claim 8;
wherein the position of the fan blade (blade of fan 50) relative to the upper portion of the hood (55) is altered (the relative positions about vertical axis Y1 as the fan blade remains stationary and the hood is rotated) through actuation of the actuator (65), as per claim 9;
wherein the position of the fan blade (blade of fan 50) includes at least a first position with an upstream portion (the bottom surface) of the fan blade located a first offset distance from the upper portion of the hood (55) and a second position (after actuation of 65) with the upstream portion of the fan blade located a second offset distance from the upper portion of the hood, as per claim 10;
wherein the actuator (65) is configured as at least one of a cylinder (65 is a hydraulic cylinder), an electrically-powered actuator, an airbag actuator, or a cam-based actuator, as per claim 11.
Independent Claim 16: Yasuhiko discloses an extractor (7, Fig. 11) configured to separate debris from a crop and expel the debris therefrom, the extractor comprising:
a hood (55);
a fan assembly (50) positioned at least partially within the hood and configured to generate a suction force to force the debris through the extractor, the fan assembly including a fan blade (unnumbered); and
a support system (56, 66) configured to alter a position of the fan blade relative to an upper portion of the hood (upon actuation of cylinder 65, the hood 55 rotates while the fan and its blades remain stationary, thereby altering the relative positions of the hood and fan blade), the support system comprising:
a common unit (58) operably coupled with the fan assembly;
a first arm (57) having a first end portion (the bottom portion) operably coupled with a first bracket (59, as numbered in Fig. 11) and a second end portion (the top portion) operably coupled to the common unit (as seen in Fig. 11); and
a second arm (another of 57) having a first end portion (the bottom portion) operably coupled with a second bracket (another of 59) and a second end portion (the top portion) operably coupled to the common unit (as seen in Fig. 11), as per claim 16.
Dependent Claims 17-19: Yasuhiko further discloses an actuator (65) operably coupled with a first end portion (the bottom end of arm 57 at 66) of the first arm (57), wherein the actuator is configured to alter a position of the common unit (58 remains stationary during rotational adjustment of hood 55) relative to the hood (55 which rotates about vertical axis Y1), as per claim 17;
wherein the position of the fan blade (blade of fan 50, which remains stationary during hood adjustment) relative to the upper portion of the hood (55) is altered through actuation of the actuator (65), as per claim 18;
wherein the actuator (65) is configured as at least one of a cylinder (65 is a hydraulic cylinder), an electrically-powered actuator, an airbag actuator, or a cam-based actuator, as per claim 19.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cazenave et al. 9,456,547.
Independent Claim 12: Cazenave discloses a computer-implemented method (“SC” method via controller 58) for agricultural harvesting, the computer-implemented method comprising:
operating a fan assembly (124) to generate a suction force within an extractor (50); and
actuating an actuator (unnumbered, hydraulic motor in Fig. 3, see also col. 5, lns. 12-17) operably coupled with a first arm (134) of a support assembly to move a fan blade (128) of the fan assembly from a first offset distance relative to an upper portion of a hood (70) to a second offset distance relative to the upper portion of a hood (as discussed col. 12, lns. 39-48, the motor drives the fan to rotate, thereby the fan blades is moved from a first rotational offset position while the hood remains stationary), as per claim 12.
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archibald in view of Cazenave et al. 9,456,547.
Dependent Claim 3: The extractor is disclosed as applied above. However, Archibald fails to disclose wherein the extractor further comprises:
an extractor rotation assembly operably coupled with the barrel, the extractor rotation assembly configured to allow for rotation of the barrel, as per claim 3.
Cazenave discloses a similar extractor (50) wherein the extractor further comprises:
an extractor rotation assembly (not shown, see col. 6, lns. 28-35) operably coupled with the barrel (96), the extractor rotation assembly configured to allow for rotation of the barrel (col. 6, lns. 28-35), as per claim 3.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the rotation assembly of Cazenave on the barrel of Archibald’s extractor in order to appropriately orient the stream of trash ejection as needed.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archibald in view of Hinds 6,869,356.
Dependent Claims 6-7: The extractor is disclosed as applied above. However, Archibald fails to disclose wherein the support system further comprises:
a first arm and a second arm, wherein the first arm and the second arm each extend vertically above the hood, as per claim 6;
wherein the first arm has a first end portion operably coupled with a first bracket and a second end portion operably coupled to a common unit, and wherein the second arm has a first end portion operably coupled with a second bracket and a second end portion operably coupled to the common unit, as per claim 7.
Hinds discloses a similar extractor wherein the support system (86) further comprises:
a first arm (86) and a second arm (the other 86 seen in Figs. 1-2), wherein the first arm and the second arm each extend vertically above the hood (74, as seen in Figs. 1-2), as per claim 6;
wherein the first arm (86) has a first end portion (its lower end) operably coupled with a first bracket (48) and a second end portion (its top end) operably coupled to a common unit (78), and wherein the second arm (the other 86) has a first end portion (its lower end) operably coupled with a second bracket (another 48) and a second end portion (its top end) operably coupled to the common unit, as per claim 7.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the support system legs of Hinds on the extractor of Archibald in order to support the fan drive motor over the top of the hood.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 13-15, 20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached PTOL-892. Cazenave et al. 9,456,547, at first blush, looks like it discloses a movable fan blade in a vertical direction like that of the invention but it is only the hub that is adjusted relative to the hood.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alicia M. Torres whose telephone number is 571-272-6997. The examiner’s fax number is 571-273-6997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph M. Rocca, can be reached at (571) 272-8971.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the group receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-3600. The fax number for this Group is 571-273-8300.
/Alicia Torres/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 July 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights