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
Specification
The abstract language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc.
In this case “disclosed” should be removed.
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 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 15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schlueter (4606177).
[AltContent: textbox (Panel/door 62 overlaps an open floor opening - inlet of the lower transition duct)][AltContent: textbox (Separating/stripper lower transition duct)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
522
394
media_image1.png
Greyscale
“(2) Referring to FIG. 1, therein is shown a cotton stripper 10 having a fore-and-aft extending main frame 12 supported for forward movement over the ground by ground wheels 16 and 18. A transversely extending harvesting head assembly 20 is supported on the forward end of the main frame 12 and includes a plurality of transversely spaced stripping row units 22, each having conventional counterrotating brush-type stripper rolls (not shown) for brushing the cotton bolls from a row of cotton plants. Conveying structure 26 extends rearwardly and upwardly from the row units 22 to move the cotton from the row units to a receptacle 28. A cab 30 is mounted on the forward end of the main frame 12 above the head assembly 20.”
“The duct 48 is connected to a separation duct 50 having an open bottom 51 and an adjustable rear wall 52.”
“The air bleed door 62 is adjusted to cause some of the heavier trash such as green cotton bolls to fall out the open bottom 51 of the separation duct 50.”
15. A harvester vehicle comprising: a header system that includes a crop header component (head assembly 20), wherein the crop header components comprises a cotton stripper header (quote above); and
an air system (air assembly 56) operably coupled to, and in communication with, the header system, the air system comprising a crop conveyor component that conveys crop through the harvester vehicle (conveying means 26 / nozzle 58),
wherein the crop conveyor component includes one or more air ducts (36) having a cotton stripper lower transition duct comprising a rear separation duct panel having a planar lower wall that overlaps with an open floor portion of an inlet of the lower transition duct (marked up; see quotes).
The following method steps are already addressed in view of the apparatus, unless otherwise noted:
20. A method for configuring a lower transition duct in a cotton stripper, the method comprising: configuring a rear separation duct panel to have a planar lower wall; configuring a cotton inlet to have an open floor portion, the cotton inlet capable of receiving cotton material and non-cotton material; and arranging the rear separation duct panel and the cotton inlet such that the planar lower wall of the rear separation duct panel extends to overlap with at least part of the open floor portion (see in re cl. 15).
Claims 15, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hummel et al (9228589).
Prima Facie Case: The patent office has the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of invalidity. A prima facie case is adequately articulated by notifying the applicant of the reasons for its rejections so long as the explanation is not "so uninformative that it prevents the applicant from recognizing and seeking to counter the grounds for rejection." Chester v. Miller, 906 F.2d 1574 (Fed. Cir. 1990). This requirement comes straight from Section 132 of the Patent Act. 35 U.S.C. §132(a).
There has never been a requirement for an examiner to make an on-the-record claim construction of every term in every rejected claim and to explain every possible difference between the prior art and the claimed invention in order to make out a prima facie rejection. This court declines to create such a burdensome and unnecessary requirement. "[Section 132] does not mandate that in order to establish prima facie anticipation, the PTO must explicitly preempt every possible response to a section 102 rejection. Section 132 merely ensures that an applicant at least be informed of the broad statutory basis for the rejection of his claims, so that he may determine what the issues are on which he can or should produce evidence." Chester, 906 F.2d at 1578
“For example, stepped deflector 32 may be provided on a back wall of separation turn 38, with a trash outlet (e.g., trash chute 30) provided below deflector 32. In this way, for example, as the trash travels along its wider path through separation turn 38, the trash may be intercepted by deflector 32 and tumble down and out of chute 30. Meanwhile, the lighter cotton may continue up duct 14 (as pulled, and then blown, by the air flow from port 34) and into basket 16.”
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Rear separation duct panel (chute 30): planar lower wall that overlaps (see closed position in fig 2) with an open floor portion of an inlet of the lower transition duct)][AltContent: textbox (Lower transition duct opening)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Protruding members / stepped deflector 32)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
648
556
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Cotton stripper header (fig 1, ref 12), air system (blower assembly 20).
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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schlueter (4606177), in view of Hummel et al (9228589).
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.
Schlueter teaches the claimed invention, except:
19. The harvester vehicle of claim 15, wherein the lower transition duct comprises a passageway therethrough, and the planar lower wall comprises a plurality of protruding members extending into the passageway (not shown).
Hummel teaches that it has been known to use protruding members above (ref 32) on the wall, in order to intercept trash (non-cotton) and tumble down and out of opening.
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 wall of Schlueter with the teachings of Hummel with a reasonable expectation of success since efficiently intercept and tumble down the non-cotton/trash, while allowing lighter cotton to continue up the duct.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 are allowed.
Claim(s) 16-18 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.
Wigdahl (6272821) teaches a deflector wall (106) with protruding member, an adjustable door / planar lower wall that overlaps with an open floor portion of an inlet of the lower transition duct (fig 4); just like the prior art above, the 1st portion & 2nd portion maybe movably coupled, however the planar wall is situated in the same section / par of the duct.
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
Prosecution Insights