DETAILED ACTION
This is on the merits of Application No. 18/749844, filed on 06/21/2024. Claims 1, 6-10, 12, 14-19, 21-22, 30, and 35-37 are pending. 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 § 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 19, 21-22, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 7640738 to Hauser et al.
Hauser discloses:
(Claim 19) A grounds maintenance vehicle (Figs. 53-58) comprising: a vehicle frame (925) extending between a first end and a second end in a longitudinal direction; a prime mover (921) coupled to the vehicle frame; a hydraulic pump assembly (Fig. 55 element 950) coupled to the vehicle frame, wherein the hydraulic pump assembly is in mechanical communication with the prime mover; a hydraulic fluid line (Fig. 58 see unlabeled hydraulic line between 950 and 140) having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end is fluidly coupled to the hydraulic pump assembly (end of hydraulic fluid line connected to 950) and wherein a minimum longitudinal clearance is defined between the prime mover and hydraulic pump assembly that is less than or equal to 120% of a maximum longitudinal distance from the hydraulic pump assembly across the hydraulic fluid line; and a drive wheel motor (140) fluidly coupled to the second end of the hydraulic fluid line (see annotated Fig. 58, distance between 921 and 950 (element B) is slightly less than the distance between the end of the hydraulic line (element A)).
(Claim 21) wherein a minimum longitudinal clearance is defined between the prime mover and hydraulic pump assembly that is less than or equal to 110% of a maximum longitudinal distance from the hydraulic pump assembly across the hydraulic fluid line (see Fig. 58, distance between 921 and 950 is slightly less than the distance between the end of the hydraulic line).
(Claim 22) wherein a minimum longitudinal clearance is defined between the prime mover and hydraulic pump assembly that is less than or equal to a maximum longitudinal distance from the hydraulic pump assembly across the hydraulic fluid line (see Fig. 58, distance between 921 and 950 is slightly less than the distance between the end of the hydraulic line).
(Claim 30) wherein between the first end and the second end of the hydraulic fluid line, the hydraulic fluid line extends from the hydraulic pump assembly towards the prime mover in the longitudinal direction (see Fig. 58, extends from 950 towards prime mover 921), and the second end of the hydraulic fluid line extends longitudinally outwardly from the drive wheel motor towards the prime mover (Fig. 58, extends from 140 towards an end of the prime mover).
PNG
media_image1.png
804
716
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hauser.
Hauser discloses:
Fig. 56 of Hauser shows the hydraulic line mostly far away from prime mover 921. Some portions are closer than others. It cannot be determined if these portions constitute more than 20% of the length of the line and if these portions are within 3 inches of 921 or not.
Hauser does not specifically disclose:
(Claim 35) wherein no more than 20% of the length of the hydraulic fluid line is within 3 inches of the prime mover.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, the structure of Hauser to have no more than 20% of the length of the hydraulic fluid line within 3 inches of the prime mover since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 6-10, 12, 14-18 and 37 are allowed.
Claim 36 is 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: See Non-Final action dated 06/10/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-14, filed 09/08/2026, with respect to the drawings and claims 1, 6-10, 12, 14-18 and 37 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections and rejections of these claims and drawings have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 09/08/2026 regarding claims 19, 21-22, 30, and 35-36 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Hauser does not have a minimum longitudinal clearance is defined between the prime mover and the hydraulic pump assembly that is less than or equal to 120% of a maximum longitudinal distance from the hydraulic pump assembly across the hydraulic fluid line. Applicant provided an annotated figure of Hauser showing what the applicant considers the corresponding measurements. However, the measurement “A” showing the maximum longitudinal distance from the hydraulic pump assembly across the hydraulic fluid line ends prematurely at a bend of the hydraulic line. I have provided the annotated figure 58 above to show what my interpretation of the distance of the hydraulic fluid line. The measurement “A” should span across the entire hydraulic fluid line, not just a portion. This measurement “A” is larger than measurement “B”, thus meeting the claim limitation, regardless of scale.
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 TIMOTHY HANNON whose telephone number is (571)270-1943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-6.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571) 270-5565. 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.
/TIMOTHY HANNON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
