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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0026, line 3, “46and” seems to be directed to state --46 and--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: openings 40 (paragraph 0017, line 8).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “82” has been used to designate both “base portion” and “outer rim member” (paragraph 0024, lines 2-3).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 10, 12, 15, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 4, line 1, “included openings” seems to be directed to state --includes openings--.
In claim 10, line 2, “the desired portion” does not provide proper antecedent basis in the claims. For purposes of further examination, this language will be interpreted as --a desired portion--.
In claim 12, line 1, “the securing apparatus” does not provide proper antecedent basis in the claims. For purposes of further examination, this language will be interpreted as --the support apparatus--, to agree with the language previously recited in independent claim 11.
In claim 15, line 1, “included openings” seems to be directed to state --includes openings--.
In claim 20, line 2, “the desired portion” does not provide proper antecedent basis in the claims. For purposes of further examination, this language will be interpreted as --a desired portion--.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hokanson US 20150209954 A1 (hereinafter, ‘954).
Regarding claim 1, ‘954 discloses an auger or core bit trailer (Fig 7; paragraph 0074), the trailer comprising:
a base portion (see annotated Fig. 9); and
a support apparatus (100/700/900) for securing an auger (120) or core bit to the trailer (paragraph 0078), the support apparatus comprising:
a stabilizer plate (118; paragraph 0035) for engaging a part of the auger or core bit (paragraph 0045); and
a tension apparatus (114/108) that engages the stabilizer plate to secure the auger or core bit to the trailer (paragraph 0057) (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
556
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, ‘954 discloses the trailer of claim 1, wherein the base portion includes an opening (904) therein to receive a tip of the auger (paragraph 0078).
Regarding claim 11, ‘954 discloses a method (800) of transporting augers or core bits (paragraph 0014) on a trailer (paragraph 0016), the method comprising:
securing a core bit or an auger (120) on a trailer (Fig. 7; paragraph 0016), the trailer having a base portion (see annotated Fig. 9 above) and a support apparatus (100/700/900) for securing the auger or core bit to the trailer (paragraph 0018); and
transporting the auger or core bit with the trailer (804; paragraph 0071).
Regarding claim 12, ‘954 discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the [support] apparatus comprises:
a stabilizer plate (118; paragraph 0035) for engaging a part of the auger or core bit (paragraph 0045); and
a tension apparatus (114/108) that engages the stabilizer plate to secure the auger or core bit to the trailer (paragraph 0057) (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, ‘954 discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the base portion includes an opening (904) therein to receive a tip of the auger (paragraph 0078).
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.
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.
Claims 3, 5-6, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hokanson US 20150209954 A1 (hereinafter, ‘954), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Hokanson US 20150209955 A1 (hereinafter,‘955).
Regarding claim 3, ‘954 does not disclose that the stabilizer plate includes a rod portion extending therefrom for engaging a hollow end of the auger or a hollow end of the core bit.
However, ‘955 discloses a lifting adapter with a rod portion (‘955 402) extending therefrom for engaging a hollow end of the auger (‘955 406) or a hollow end of the core bit (‘955 Fig. 4; ‘955 paragraph 0062).
Therefore, it 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 to combine the stabilizer plate of ‘954 with the rod portion as taught by ‘955 with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of using an existing and commonly used hollow end recess for drive motors generally found in augers (‘955 paragraph 0062) as an additional structural connection between an auger and support apparatus to prevent undesired motion during transporting, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 5, ‘954 does not disclose support posts supported by the trailer positioned adjacent to the auger.
However, ‘955 discloses support posts (‘955 112; ‘955 Fig. 1A) supported by a trailer (‘955 paragraphs 0028 and 0040) positioned adjacent to the auger (‘955 Fig. 5; ‘955 paragraphs 0013-0014 and 0068).
Therefore, it 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 to combine the trailer of ‘954 with the support post configuration as taught by ‘955 with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of providing additional securing means from the support apparatus to the auger during transportation (‘955 paragraphs 0010-0011).
Regarding claim 6, ‘954 does not disclose support posts that include a channel disposed in a top portion or an opening disposed through the top portion that engages the tension apparatus when the auger is secured to the trailer.
However, ‘955 discloses support posts that include a channel disposed in a top portion or an opening disposed through the top portion that engages the tension apparatus when the auger is secured to the trailer (‘955 paragraphs 0040-0041).
Therefore, it 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 to combine the trailer of ‘954 with the support post features as taught by ‘955 with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of further securing structural components to each other (‘955 paragraphs 0040-0041) to prevent undesired auger movement during transportation, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 14, ‘954 does not disclose that the stabilizer plate includes a rod portion extending therefrom for engaging a hollow end of the auger or a hollow end of the core bit.
However, ‘955 discloses a lifting adapter with a rod portion (‘955 402) extending therefrom for engaging a hollow end of the auger (‘955 406) or a hollow end of the core bit (‘955 Fig. 4; ‘955 paragraph 0062).
Therefore, it 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 to combine the stabilizer plate of ‘954 with the rod portion as taught by ‘955 with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of using an existing and commonly used hollow end recess for drive motors generally found in augers (‘955 paragraph 0062) as an additional structural connection between an auger and support apparatus to prevent undesired motion during transporting, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, ‘954 does not disclose support posts supported by the trailer positioned adjacent to the auger and the support posts include a channel disposed in a top portion or an opening disposed through the top portion that engages the tension apparatus when the auger is secured to the trailer.
However, ‘955 discloses support posts (‘955 112; ‘955 Fig. 1A) supported by a trailer (‘955 paragraphs 0028 and 0040) positioned adjacent to the auger (‘955 Fig. 5; ‘955 paragraphs 0013-0014 and 0068), where the support posts include a channel disposed in a top portion or an opening disposed through the top portion that engages the tension apparatus when the auger is secured to the trailer (‘955 paragraphs 0040-0041).
Therefore, it 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 to combine the trailer of ‘954 with the support post configuration and features as taught by ‘955 with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of providing additional securing means between structural components from the support apparatus to the auger during transportation (‘955 paragraphs 0010-0011 and 0040-0041) to prevent undesired auger movement during transportation, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hokanson US 20150209954 A1 (hereinafter, ‘954), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Arico US 7306416 B1 (hereinafter, Arico).
Regarding claim 4, ‘954 does not disclose that the stabilizer plate [includes] openings disposed in an outer part of the stabilizer plate or ring elements secured to the outer part of the stabilizer plate, the tension apparatus engageable with the openings or the ring elements.
However, Arico discloses a cargo restraint device (Arico 10) with openings (Arico 13A) disposed in an outer part (Arico 12D) of the device or ring elements (Arico 13) secured to the outer part of the device (Arico Fig. 1), wherein a tension apparatus may be engageable with the openings or the ring elements (Arico col. 4, lines 14-20).
Therefore, it 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 to combine the stabilizer plate as taught by ‘954 with the openings or ring elements as taught by Arico with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of providing additional engagement points from various directions between the stabilizer plate and tension apparatus for restraining cargo (Arico Fig. 1; Arico col. 2, lines 62-67), such as an auger, to prevent undesired cargo motion during transporting, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 15, ‘954 does not disclose that the stabilizer plate [includes] openings disposed in an outer part of the stabilizer plate or ring elements secured to the outer part of the stabilizer plate, the tension apparatus engageable with the openings or the ring elements.
However, Arico discloses a cargo restraint device (Arico 10) with openings (Arico 13A) disposed in an outer part (Arico 12D) of the device or ring elements (Arico 13) secured to the outer part of the device (Arico Fig. 1), wherein a tension apparatus may be engageable with the openings or the ring elements (Arico col. 4, lines 14-20).
Therefore, it 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 to combine the stabilizer plate as taught by ‘954 with the openings or ring elements as taught by Arico with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of providing additional engagement points from various directions between the stabilizer plate and tension apparatus for restraining cargo (Arico Fig. 1; Arico col. 2, lines 62-67), such as an auger, to prevent undesired cargo motion during transporting, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 and 17-20 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.
Claim 7 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein the base portion includes an outer rim a bit end of the core bit can extend into to prevent lateral movement of the core bit.
Claim 8 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein the base portion further comprises an inner rim that creates a channel between the outer rim and the inner rim for receiving the bit end of the core bit to stabilize the core bit on the trailer.
Claim 9 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein the base portion further includes gusset plates disposed on an inside portion of the outer rim to cause the core bit to be centrally disposed inside the outer rim of the base portion.
Claim 10 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein each gusset plate has an angled side to help guide the core bit to [a] desired position within the outer rim.
Claim 17 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein the base portion includes an outer rim a bit end of the core bit can extend into to prevent lateral movement of the core bit.
Claim 18 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein the base portion further comprises an inner rim that creates a channel between the outer rim and the inner rim for receiving the bit end of the core bit to stabilize the core bit on the trailer.
Claim 19 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein the base portion further includes gusset plates disposed on an inside portion of the outer rim to cause the core bit to be centrally disposed inside the outer rim of the base portion.
Claim 20 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for wherein each gusset plate has an angled side to help guide the core bit to [a] desired position within the outer rim.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Hokanson US 20150209954 A1 (hereinafter, ‘954) discloses a trailer with a support apparatus (100/700/900) for securing and transporting augers (120) on a trailer (Fig. 7; paragraph 0078), that includes a stabilizer plate (118; paragraph 0035) for engaging a part of the auger (paragraph 0045) and a tension apparatus (114/108) that engages the stabilizer plate to secure the auger to the trailer (paragraph 0057) (Fig. 1), as was previously discussed above. However, ‘954 does not disclose a trailer designed for securing and transporting core bits and their respective features, including a channeled rim with angled gusset plates. This would not be modified as ‘954 teaches a support apparatus designed for augers and their features such as their tips, center shaft, flighting, and securement on a trailer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hokanson US 20120234780 A1 discloses an auger support apparatus designed to be transported by a vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anayansi Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-3138. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:30AM - 4:30PM.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at (571) 270-5500. 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.
/Anayansi Santiago/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights