Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/766,681

HAYMAKING MACHINE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 09, 2024
Priority
Jul 14, 2023 — DE 10 2023 118 727.9
Examiner
FABIAN-KOVACS, ARPAD
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Maschinenfabrik Bernard Krone GmbH & Co. Kg
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
1590 granted / 1874 resolved
+24.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1881
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
37.8%
-2.2% vs TC avg
§112
6.4%
-33.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1874 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION 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) 11-16, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dechrishtoper et al (EP 3909417), in view of Van Den Engel (2002/0157371). The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. Dechrishtoper teaches the claimed invention, except as noted: “The sensor assembly 63 may include one or more tine sensors 96 (e.g., piezoelectric sensor). In certain embodiments, the tines sensors 96 may be positioned on one or more of the tines 36 and configured to output a signal indicative of pressure, acceleration, strain, force, or any combination thereof, on the tines 36. In certain embodiments, at least one tine sensor includes a piezoelectric sensor configured to convert a measured parameter (e.g., measured pressure, acceleration, strain, force, or any combination thereof) into an electrical charge indicative of the measured parameter and communicate the measured parameter to the controller 50. In certain embodiments, the tine sensors 96 may measure a bending force on two tines positioned on opposite lateral sides of the agricultural raking vehicle. The controller may be configured to receive signals indicative of bending forces from the two tine sensors and to detect an excessive bending force in response to either bending force exceeding a threshold value. In certain embodiments, a bending force that is excessive may serve as an indication that the tines 36 are in contact with the ground 84. The controller instructs the actuator(s) to rise the tines 36 in response to detection of the excessive bending force.” 11: A haymaking machine for tedding or raking agricultural stalk or leaf material, the haymaking machine comprising: a machine beam (40); and at least one tedding or raking rotor which is arranged on the machine beam (37), the at least one tedding or raking rotor, in a working and operating position, being driven in a rotation about an approximately vertical axis (fig 1), the at least one tedding or raking rotor comprising, at least two tine arms which are aligned approximately radially and which are uniformly distributed in a circumferential direction about the vertical axis (raking member 34), at least one first spring tine having a first length which is arranged on the at least two tine arms, at least one second spring tine having a second length which is arranged on the at least two tine arms, the second length being smaller than the first length of the at least one first spring tine (spring tine 36 appears to be the same length, i.e. thus the 2nd length is not shown to be smaller), at least one first measuring device which interacts with the at least one first spring tine, the at least one first measuring device being configured to measure a force acting on the at least one first spring tine and to emit measuring signals thereof, and at least one second measuring device which interacts with the at least one second spring tine, the at least one second measuring device being configured to measure a force acting on the at least one second spring tine and to emit measuring signals thereof (see quote above, force / bending force, strain etc. & measurement communicated to a controller, which is not claimed). Van Den Engel teaches that it has been known to design the spring tine with a different length to provide different elasticity (par. 13). [AltContent: textbox (1st & 2nd spring tines have different lengths)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow] PNG media_image1.png 420 296 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the length of the 2nd spring tine of Dechrishtoper with the teachings of Van Den Engel, with a reasonable expectation of success since the longer tine spring provides increased flexibility and better pulling (Van Den Engel, par. 13), and discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233, and discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) 12: The haymaking machine as recited in claim 11, wherein, the force acting on the at least one first spring tine is detected by measuring at least one of a torque, a change in position, and a deformation of the at least one first spring tine, and/or the force acting on the at least one second spring tine is detected by measuring at least one of a torque, a change in position, and a deformation of the at least one second spring tine (parameter listed, in particular bending or deformation is taught in Dechrishtoper, see quote). 13: The haymaking machine as recited in claim 11, wherein, the at least one first measuring device is arranged on the at least one first spring tine, and the at least one second measuring device is arranged on the at least one second spring tine, or the at least one first measuring device is connected at one end to the tine arm and at the other end to the at least one first spring tine, and the at least one second measuring device is connected at one end to the tine arm and at the other end to the at least one second spring tine (taught in Dechrishtoper, positioned or arranged on one or more of the tines). 14: The haymaking machine as recited in claim 11, wherein, the at least one first spring tine and the at least one second spring tine are arranged as a pair of tines, each of the pair of tines comprise an attachment section which is configured to be resiliently flexible, and each of the at least one first spring tine and the at least one second spring tine are arranged to extend towards the ground from the attachment section (taught in the combination, see Van Den Engel design, and by definition the spring tine is flexible to one skilled in the art). 15: The haymaking machine as recited in claim 14, wherein, the at least one first measuring device is arranged on the at least one first spring tine of the pair of tines and the at least one second measuring device is arranged on the at least one second spring tine of the pair of tines, or the at least one first measuring device is arranged on a first pair of tines and the at least one second measuring device is arranged on a second pair of tines (as taught in the combination, the measurement can be arranged on one or more spring tines). 16: The haymaking machine as recited in claim 11, wherein, the at least one first measuring device is a strain gauge sensor, and the at least one second measuring device is a strain gauge sensor (as taught in the combination, see quote in Dechrishtoper, the strain sensor is by definition a strain gauge to one skilled in the art). “A tractor or other work vehicle may tow an agricultural rake implement through a field to perform an agricultural task, such as raking agricultural product on the field. A user may operate the tractor/work vehicle to move the agricultural rake through the field to perform the raking task. The agricultural rake may be used to collect cut agricultural product (e.g., hay, straw, etc.) into organized piles of agricultural product (hereinafter "windrows") for later collection (e.g. by a baler or a loader wagon). The agricultural rake may expand the agricultural product to a target consistency and turn the agricultural product over so that the agricultural product may dry. The agricultural rake may be utilized in the evening to protect the agricultural product from morning dew. The next day a tedder may be used to spread it again, so that the hay dries more quickly.” (Dechrishtoper) 19: A work train comprising: a tractor; and the haymaking machine as recited in claim 11, wherein, the haymaking machine is attached to or mounted to the tractor (taught above, see Dechrishtoper). Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 20 is/are allowed. Claim(s) 17-18, 21 is/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. See form 892. Wolfgang et al (FR 2507431) teaches at least one first spring tine having a first length which is arranged on the at least two tine arms, at least one second spring tine having a second length which is arranged on the at least two tine arms, the second length being smaller than the first length of the at least one first spring tine (fig 7). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARPAD FABIAN-KOVACS whose telephone number is (571) 272-6990. The examiner can normally be reached Mo-Th. 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, Joseph Rocca can be reached on (571) 272-8971. 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. /ARPAD FABIAN-KOVACS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 09, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12677722
AUTOMATED HEADER RETAINING SYSTEM FOR LATERAL TRANSPORT CENTER-PIVOT MOWER
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677742
Sugarcane Harvester With Internal Storage Reservoir For Billets
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677750
Secondary Cutoff Configuration for a Cross-Flow Fan
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677753
ROUND BALERS WITH A REDIRECTING ASSEMBLY
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12672605
HEMP PICKING MACHINE FOR PICKING HEMP
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+3.1%)
1y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1874 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month