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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/16/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings submitted on 07/16/2024 are being considered by the examiner.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an agitating mechanism … to process waste material and direct waste material toward the suction inlet” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 8, the phrase “the dedicated motor is attached to the collector frame proximate to the other of the first operable arm and the second operable arm” renders the claim vague and indefinite because it is not clear what the term “the other” refers to. It may be comprehended such that the suction inlet is disposed proximate to one of the first or second operable arm as recited in claim 7, and the motor is disposed proximate to the other operable arm. However, claim 8 does not depend from claim 7. For examination purpose, therefore, the examiner has interpreted the motor can be attached to the collector frame proximate to one of the operable arms.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch (CA 2665894A1, hereinafter Mensch ‘894), in view of Mensch (US 2006/0243463, hereinafter Mensch ‘463).
Regarding claim 1, Mensch ‘894 discloses a vehicle for a livestock facility (fig. 1, scraper vehicle 20. A use for a livestock facility is an intended use), the vehicle comprising:
a storage tank positioned on a vehicle frame (fig. 1, a tank 24 is positioned on a vehicle frame 21);
a collector frame attached to the vehicle frame (figs. 1 and 2, a frame [corresponds to the recited collector frame] is attached to the vehicle frame 21. The frame is associated with a scraper assembly 21);
first and second operable arms that are attached to the collector frame and positioned proximate a front of the collector frame, the first and second operable arms at least partially defining a collection area (figs. 1-2 and p. 3:9-10, left and right side scrapers 27, 28 [correspond to the recited first and second operable arms] are disposed at front of the recited collector frame. The scrapers 27, 28 are horizontally pivotally movable. An area covered by the side scrapers 27, 28 can be defined as the recited collection area. Examiner notes specification of the Mensch ‘894 presents the side scrapers 27, 28, but it appears the side scrapers are designated as 37, 38 in the figures);
a vacuum system having a suction inlet that extends from proximate the collection area to the storage tank (figs. 1-2 and p. 3:3-7, a vacuum system 23 has a suction line 24A [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] for collecting debris and storing them in the tank 24), but does not disclose an agitating mechanism that is positioned within the collection area, the agitating mechanism operating within the collection area to process waste material and direct waste material toward the suction inlet.
Mensch ‘463 teaches, in an analogous cleaning vehicle field of endeavor, an agitating mechanism that is positioned within the collection area, the agitating mechanism (this element is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The agitation mechanism can be an agitator and/or auger used for assisting a vacuum-powered waste collector to collect waste material as described in ¶ 0002) operating within the collection area to process waste material and direct waste material toward the suction inlet (figs. 1-1A and ¶ 0021 and abstract, an implement 20 comprises an implement head 31 [corresponds to the recited agitating mechanism], which can be used as a sweeper or a rake, is mounted in front of a vehicle. The implement 20 also includes side support plates 29, 30 which may be equivalent to the recited first and second operable arms for defining the recited collection area. The implement head 31 can process waste material within the collection area. Because the implement head 31 is disposed in front of the vehicle, by combining with Mensch ‘894, the processed waste material can be directed toward the suction line 24A [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] of Mensch ‘894).
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 the vehicle of Mensch ‘894 to provide the agitating mechanism as taught by Mensch ‘463 in order to process ground material. Because the implement head is coupled with the vehicle, a heavy duty ground work can be done conveniently.
Claims 2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch ‘894 in view of Mensch ‘463, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Miller et al. (AU 2016100219A4, hereinafter Miller).
Regarding claim 2, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the agitating mechanism is an auger that operates to direct waste material toward the suction inlet.
Mensch ‘463 discloses the implement head 31 as the recited agitating mechanism but it is not an auger. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines an auger is any of various tools or devices with a helical shaft or part.
Miller teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, the agitating mechanism is an auger that operates to direct waste material toward the suction inlet (figs. 6-9, a cleaner comprises an agitator 26 which may be a brushroll 142. Th brushroll has helical parts, thus it is considered as the recited auger. The brushroll directs debris toward a suction nozzle 16. By combining with Mensch ‘894 and Mensch ‘463, the auger directs waste material toward the suction line 24A of Mensch ‘894).
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 the agitation mechanism of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 to provide the auger as taught by Miller so that the agitator agitates debris on a surface and they can be vacuumed effectively.
Regarding claim 4, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 2, wherein the suction inlet is positioned to one side of the collection area (Mensch ‘894, fig. 3, the suction line 24A [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] is positioned at a center of the collection area. Claim does not define what the one side of the collection area is, thus any position can be the recited one side of the collection area).
Regarding claim 5, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 2, wherein the agitating mechanism is operated by a dedicated motor that is attached to the collector frame (Mensch ‘463, figs. 11-12 and ¶ 0037, the implement head 31A [corresponds to the recited agitating mechanism] is driven by a motor 38A. The motor is attached to a frame 26A [corresponds to the recited collector frame]).
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 the agitator mechanism of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the dedicated motor as taught by Mensch ‘463 so that the agitator can continuously rotate for effective agitation of the debris.
Regarding claim 6, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 5, wherein the dedicated motor is disposed within a motor housing that is attached to the collector frame (Mensch ‘463, figs. 11-12 and ¶ 0037, the motor 38A is disposed within a motor mount 36A [corresponds to the recited motor housing]).
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 the agitation mechanism of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the motor housing as taught by Mensch ‘463. The motor mount protects the motor from the nearby rotating components such as the agitator and drive train (Mensch ‘463 ¶ 0022).
Claims 3, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch ‘894 in view of Mensch ‘463 and Miller, as applied to claim 2 above, and in further view of Alton (CN 1668238A).
Regarding claim 3, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 2, but does not disclose the suction inlet is disposed proximate an exit end of the auger.
Alton teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, the suction inlet is disposed proximate an exit end of the auger (fig. 6 and Alton English translation, p. 6:16-17, a nozzle assembly 10 of a cleaner comprise a roller brush 18 [corresponds to the recited agitating mechanism/auger]; fig. 18 and p. 13:22-28, the nozzle assembly comprises suction pipes 261a, 261b which are the recited suction inlet disposed at a side of the cleaner. By combining with Mensch ‘894 and Mensch ‘463, there can be the recited suction inlet on a side of the collector frame where it can be proximate to the recited exit end of the auger).
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 the vacuum system of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the suction inlet proximate the exit end of the auger as taught by Alton. While the agitator helps agitating debris at a center of a collection area, the side suction inlet may help suctioning debris from a large area of ground because the debris on a side of the cleaner may be vacuumed.
Regarding claim 7, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 2, but does not disclose the suction inlet is disposed to one side of the collector frame proximate one of the first operable arm and the second operable arm.
Alton teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, the suction inlet is disposed to one side of the collector frame proximate one of the first operable arm and the second operable arm (fig. 6 and Alton English translation, p. 6:16-17, a nozzle assembly 10 of a cleaner comprise a roller brush 18 [corresponds to the recited agitating mechanism/auger]; fig. 18 and p. 13:22-28, the nozzle assembly comprises suction pipes 261a, 261b which are the recited suction inlet disposed at a side of the cleaner. By combining with Mensch ‘894 and Mensch ‘463, there can be the recited suction inlet disposed on the collector frame near one of the operable arms of Mensch ‘894).
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 the vacuum system of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the suction inlet proximate the operable arm as taught by Alton for effective suctioning of the waste near the operable arm because the operable arm collects the waste.
Regarding claim 9, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 3, wherein the exit end of the auger is attached to an inlet housing that partially surrounds the suction inlet (Alton English translation, p. 6:27-36 and fig. 5, a vertical end section 30a or 30b [corresponds to the recited inlet housing] includes the suction portion 28a or 28b [corresponds to the recited suction inlet]. By combining with Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller, the recited inlet housing would be disposed at the exit end of the auger).
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 the vacuum system of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton to provide the inlet housing as taught by Alton. The inlet housing can provide protection to the suction inlet by preventing it from being damaged when large waste collides with the suction inlet continuously during suctioning.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch ‘894 in view of Mensch ‘463 and Miller, as applied to claim 5 above, and in further view of Uchendu et al. (US 2021/0386262, hereinafter Uchendu).
Regarding claim 8, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 5, but does not disclose the dedicated motor is attached to the collector frame proximate to the other of the first operable arm and the second operable arm.
Uchendu teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, the dedicated motor is attached to the collector frame proximate to the other of the first operable arm and the second operable arm (fig. 1 and ¶ 0027, a cleaner comprises a rotatable agitator 110 [corresponds to the recited agitating mechanism] and an agitator motor 126 [corresponds to the recited dedicated motor] drives the agitator. The agitator motor 126 is disposed one side of the agitator. By combining with Mensch ‘894, the motor would be attached to the collector frame proximate to one of the operable arms).
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 the agitating mechanism of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the dedicated motor proximate to the one of the operable arms as taught by Uchendu for effective rotation of the agitator with minimum power loss from the motor.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch ‘894 in view of Mensch ‘463 and Miller, as applied to claim 2 above, and in further view of Mensch (US 5,075,985, hereinafter Mensch ‘985).
Regarding claim 10, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 2, but does not disclose a flexible member extends downward from the collector frame, the first operable arm, and the second operable arm to further define the collection area.
Mensch ‘985 teaches, in an analogous cleaning vehicle field of endeavor, a flexible member extends downward from the collector frame, the first operable arm, and the second operable arm to further define the collection area (fig. 4 and col. 2:47-66, a vehicle comprises a scraper assembly 20 comprising a frame and an upper edge 62 [corresponds to the recited operable arm]. A scraper element 26 extends downward from the frame and the arm of the scraper assembly 20; col. 6:58-61, the scraper element is resiliently flexible).
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 the operable arms of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the flexible member as taught by Mensch ‘985. The flexible member allows significant amount of waste to be collected and pushed forward at a time (Mensch ‘985 col. 5:64-6:2).
Regarding claim 11, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Mensch ‘985 teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 10, wherein the auger is attached to the collector frame, wherein a thread of the auger extends downward and into the collection area adjacent to the flexible member.
Mensch ‘463 as modified by Miller teaches the auger of Miller is attached to the collector frame of Mensch ‘463. A thread of auger extends into the collection area, and by combining with Mesch ‘985, the thread would be disposed adjacent the flexible scraper element.
However, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Mensch ‘985 does not disclose the auger is attached to the collector frame above the flexible member.
However, as discussed above, Mesch ‘463 and Miller teach the auger is attached to the collector frame, and Mensch ‘985 teaches the flexible scraper element.
Then 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 the vehicle of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Mensch ‘985 to provide the auger attached above the flexible member. The flexible member needs to be placed in a low position so that the agitated waste by the auger does not escape the collection area. It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch (CA 2665894A1, hereinafter Mensch ‘894), in view of Mensch (US 2006/0243463, hereinafter Mensch ‘463), Miller et al. (AU 2016100219A4, hereinafter Miller), and Alton (CN 1668238A).
Regarding claim 12, Mensch ‘894 discloses vehicle for a livestock facility (fig. 1, scraper vehicle 20. A use for a livestock facility is an intended use), the vehicle comprising:
a collector frame configured to attach to a vehicle frame (figs. 1 and 2, a frame [corresponds to the recited collector frame] is attached to the vehicle frame 21. The frame is associated with a scraper assembly 21);
opposing arms that are operably attached to the collector frame, the opposing arms defining a collection region (figs. 1-2 and p. 3:9-10, left and right side scrapers 27, 28 [correspond to the recited opposing arms] are disposed at front of the recited collector frame. The scrapers 27, 28 are horizontally pivotally movable. An area covered by the side scrapers 27, 28 can be defined as the recited collection area. Examiner notes specification of the Mensch ‘894 presents the side scrapers 27, 28, but it appears the side scrapers are designated as 37, 38 in the figures);
a suction inlet attached to the collector frame, the suction inlet configured to draw a waste material away from the collection region (figs. 1-2 and p. 3:3-7, a vacuum system 23 has a suction line 24A [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] for collecting debris and storing them in the tank 24), but does not disclose an agitator having a drive end and an exit end, wherein the drive end is attached to the collector frame and positioned proximate to a second operable arm of the opposing arms, wherein the auger rotates within a collection area and is configured to direct the waste material toward the suction inlet.
Mensch ‘463 teaches, in an analogous cleaning vehicle field of endeavor, an agitator having a drive end and an exit end, wherein the drive end is attached to the collector frame and positioned proximate to a second operable arm of the opposing arms, wherein the auger rotates within a collection area and is configured to direct the waste material toward the suction inlet (figs. 1, 1A, 2 and ¶ 0021 and abstract, an implement 20 comprises an implement head 31, which can be used as an agitator, is attached to a cross tube 28 [corresponds to the recited collector frame]. The implement head 31 has the recited drive end where the motor 38 is disposed, and the other side of the implement head 31 is considered as the recited exit end. The implement 20 also includes side support plates 29, 30 which may be equivalent to the recited first and second operable arms for defining the recited collection area. The side support arm 30, which is near the recited drive end of the implement head 31 can be considered as the recited second operable arm. The implement head 31 rotates and processes waste material within the collection area. Because the implement head 31 is disposed in front of the vehicle, by combining with Mensch ‘894, the processed waste material can be directed toward the suction line 24A [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] of Mensch ‘894).
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 the vehicle of Mensch ‘894 to provide the agitator as taught by Mensch ‘463 in order to process ground material. Because the implement head is coupled with the vehicle, a heavy duty ground work can be done conveniently.
Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 does not disclose the agitator is an auger.
As discussed above in claim 2, Merriam-Webster dictionary defines an auger is any of various tools or devices with a helical shaft or part.
Miller teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, the agitator is an auger (figs. 6-9, a cleaner comprises an agitator 26 which may be a brushroll 142. Th brushroll has helical parts, thus it is considered as the recited auger).
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 the agitation mechanism of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 to provide the auger as taught by Miller so that the agitator agitates debris on a surface and they can be vacuumed effectively.
Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller does not disclose a suction inlet positioned proximate to a first operable arm of the opposing arms and the exit end of the auger.
Alton teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, a suction inlet positioned proximate to a first operable arm of the opposing arms and the exit end of the auger (fig. 6 and Alton English translation, p. 6:16-17, a nozzle assembly 10 of a cleaner comprise a roller brush 18 [corresponds to the recited auger]; fig. 18 and p. 13:22-28, the nozzle assembly comprises suction pipes 261a, 261b which are the recited suction inlet disposed at a side of the cleaner. By combining with Mensch ‘894 and Mensch ‘463, there can be the recited suction inlet on a side of the collector frame where it can be proximate to the recited exit end of the auger. As discussed above, the side support plate 30 near the drive end of the auger can be designated as the recited second operable arm. Then the side support plate 29 near the exit end of the auger is designated as the recited first operable arm, and the suction inlet can be disposed proximate to the recited first operable arm).
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 the vacuum system of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the suction inlet proximate the exit end of the auger and the first operable arm as taught by Alton. While the agitator helps agitating debris at a center of a collection area, the side suction inlet may help suctioning debris from a large area of ground because the debris on a side of the cleaner may be vacuumed.
Regarding claim 13, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 12, wherein the auger rotates about a rotational axis that is perpendicular to a central axis of the collector frame (Mensch ‘463 ¶ 0021, the implement head 31 rotates and its rotational axis is perpendicular to a central axis of the collector frame as shown in annotated Mensch ‘463 fig. 1 below).
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 the auger of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton to provide it rotational axis is perpendicular to the central axis of the collector frame as taught by Mensch ‘463 so that the rotating implement head exerts maximum force in agitating the waste on the ground when a vehicle moves forward.
PNG
media_image1.png
859
1184
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Mensch ‘463 Figure 1
Regarding claim 14, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 12, wherein the exit end of the auger is rotationally attached to the suction inlet (Mensch ‘463 ¶ 0021, the implement head 31 [equivalent to the recited auger] rotates; as discussed in the rejection of claim 12, combination of Mensch ‘894 with Mensch ‘463 and Alton teaches the recited suction inlet can be disposed proximate to the recited exit end of the auger).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch ‘894 in view of Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton, as applied to claim 12 above, and in further view of Uchendu.
Regarding claim 15, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 12, wherein the suction inlet is positioned to one side of the collection area (Alton fig. 5, a suction inlet is positioned at a side of the nozzle assembly 10, thus the suction inlet can be positioned to one side of the collection area), but does not disclose a motor that drives the auger is positioned to an opposing side of the collection area.
Uchendu teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, a motor that drives the auger is positioned to a side of the collection area (fig. 1 and ¶ 0027, a cleaner comprises a rotatable agitator 110 [corresponds to the recited agitating mechanism] and an agitator motor 126 [corresponds to the recited dedicated motor] drives the agitator. The agitator motor 126 is disposed one side of the agitator, thus the motor can be positioned to one side of the collection area).
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 the agitating mechanism of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton to provide the dedicated motor proximate to one side of the collection arm as taught by Uchendu for effective rotation of the agitator with minimum power loss from the motor.
Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, Alton, and Uchendu does not disclose explicitly the suction inlet and the motor are disposed at opposing sides.
However, Alton teaches the suction inlet is disposed at a side with respect to the recite auger. Uchendu also teaches the motor is disposed at a side with respect to the recited auger. Then, 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 the cleaning device of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, Alton, and Uchendu to provide the suction inlet and the motor at opposing sides for effective component arrangement within a cleaning device. It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch ‘894 in view of Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton, as applied to claim 12 above, and in further view of Mensch ‘985.
Regarding claim 16, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 12, but does not disclose a flexible member extends downward from the collector frame, the first operable arm, and the second operable arm to further define the collection area.
Mensch ‘985 teaches, in an analogous cleaning vehicle field of endeavor, a flexible member extends downward from the collector frame, the first operable arm, and the second operable arm to further define the collection area (fig. 4 and col. 2:47-66, a vehicle comprises a scraper assembly 20 comprising a frame and an upper edge 62 [corresponds to the recited operable arm]. A scraper element 26 extends downward from the frame and the arm of the scraper assembly 20; col. 6:58-61, the scraper element is resiliently flexible).
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 the operable arms of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton to provide the flexible member as taught by Mensch ‘985. The flexible member allows significant amount of waste to be collected and pushed forward at a time (Mensch ‘985 col. 5:64-6:2).
Regarding claim 17, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, Alton, and Mensch ‘985 teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 16, wherein the auger is attached to the collector frame above the flexible member, wherein a thread of the auger extends downward and into the collection area adjacent to the flexible member.
Mensch ‘463 as modified by Miller teaches the auger of Miller is attached to the collector frame of Mensch ‘463. A thread of auger extends into the collection area, and by combining with Mesch ‘985, the thread would be disposed adjacent the flexible scraper element.
However, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Mensch ‘985 does not disclose the auger is attached to the collector frame above the flexible member.
However, as discussed above, Mesch ‘463 and Miller teach the auger is attached to the collector frame, and Mensch ‘985 teaches the flexible scraper element.
Then 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 the vehicle of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, Alton, and Mensch ‘985 to provide the auger attached above the flexible member. The flexible member needs to be placed in a low position so that the agitated waste by the auger does not escape the collection area. It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch (CA 2665894A1, hereinafter Mensch ‘894), in view of Mensch (US 2006/0243463, hereinafter Mensch ‘463), Miller et al. (AU 2016100219A4, hereinafter Miller), and Alton (CN 1668238A).
Regarding claim 18, Mensch ‘463 discloses a waste collection assembly for a vehicle (figs. 1-2, a retractable liftable scraper assembly 22 mountable to a vehicle), the waste collection assembly comprising:
a collector frame, the collector frame having a first side and a second side that are divided by an axis of symmetry (fig. 2, a frame [corresponds to the recited collector frame] has symmetrically disposed left and right side scrapers. A side having the left side scraper can be the recited first side and a side having the right side scraper can be the recited second side);
opposing operable arms that are attached to the collector frame, the opposing arms defining a collection region (figs. 1-2 and p. 3:9-10, left and right side scrapers 27, 28 [correspond to the recited opposing arms] are attached to the recited collector frame. The scrapers 27, 28 are horizontally pivotally movable. An area covered by the side scrapers 27, 28 can be defined as the recited collection area. Examiner notes specification of the Mensch ‘894 presents the side scrapers 27, 28, but it appears the side scrapers are designated as 37, 38 in the figures);
a suction inlet, the suction inlet configured to draw a waste material away from the collection region (figs. 1-2 and p. 3:3-7, a vacuum system 23 has a suction line 24A [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] for collecting debris from the collection region and storing them in the tank 24), but does not disclose a collector frame having an attachment interface for attaching to a vehicle frame, the vehicle comprises an auger having a drive end that is attached to the second side of the collector frame and an exit end that is attached to the suction inlet, wherein the auger rotates within a collection area and is configured to direct the waste material toward the suction inlet.
Mensch ‘463 teaches, in an analogous cleaning vehicle field of endeavor, a collector frame having an attachment interface for attaching to a vehicle frame (¶ 0021 and annotated Mensch ‘463 fig. 1 above, the implement 20 is mounted to a vehicle 21 via a vehicle-attached frame 22 [corresponds to the recited attachment interface]), the vehicle comprises an agitator having a drive end that is attached to the second side of the collector frame and an exit end that is attached to the suction inlet, wherein the auger rotates within a collection area and is configured to direct the waste material toward the suction inlet (figs. 1, 1A, 2 and ¶ 0021 and abstract, an implement 20 comprises an implement head 31, which can be used as an agitator, is attached to a cross tube 28 [corresponds to the recited collector frame]. The implement head 31 has the recited drive end where the motor 38 is disposed, and the other side of the implement head 31 is considered as the recited exit end. The implement 20 also includes side support plates 29, 30 which may be equivalent to the recited first and second operable arms for defining the recited collection area. The cross tube near the recited drive end of the implement head 31 can be considered as the recited second side of the collector frame. The cross tube near the recited exit end of the implement head 31 can be considered as the recited first side of the collector frame. The implement head 31 rotates and processes waste material within the collection area. Because the implement head 31 is disposed in front of the vehicle, by combining with Mensch ‘894, the processed waste material can be directed toward the suction line 24A [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] of Mensch ‘894).
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 the vehicle of Mensch ‘894 to provide attachment interface and the agitator as taught by Mensch ‘463 in order to process ground material by driving a vehicle. Because the implement head is coupled with the vehicle, a heavy duty ground work can be done conveniently.
Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 does not disclose the agitator is an auger.
As discussed above in claim 2, Merriam-Webster dictionary defines an auger is any of various tools or devices with a helical shaft or part.
Miller teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, the agitator is an auger (figs. 6-9, a cleaner comprises an agitator 26 which may be a brushroll 142. Th brushroll has helical parts, thus it is considered as the recited auger).
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 the agitation mechanism of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 to provide the auger as taught by Miller so that the agitator agitates debris on a surface and they can be vacuumed effectively.
Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller does not disclose a suction inlet attached to the first side of the collector frame and an exit end of the auger.
Alton teaches, in an analogous cleaning device field of endeavor, a suction inlet attached to the first side of the collector frame and an exit end of the auger (fig. 6 and Alton English translation, p. 6:16-17, a nozzle assembly 10 of a cleaner comprise a roller brush 18 [corresponds to the recited auger]; fig. 18 and p. 13:22-28, the nozzle assembly comprises suction pipes 261a, 261b which are the recited suction inlet disposed at a side of the cleaner. By combining with Mensch ‘894 and Mensch ‘463, there can be the recited suction inlet on a side of the collector frame where it can be proximate to the recited exit end of the auger. As discussed above, the cross tube of Mensch ‘463 near the drive end of the auger can be designated as the recited second side of the collector frame. Then the cross tube 28 near the exit end of the auger is designated as the recited first side of the collector frame, and the suction inlet can be disposed proximate to the recited first side of the collector frame).
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 the vacuum system of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller to provide the suction inlet proximate the exit end of the auger and the first side of the collector frame as taught by Alton. While the agitator helps agitating debris at a center of a collection area, the side suction inlet may help suctioning debris from a large area of ground because the debris on a side of the cleaner may be vacuumed.
Regarding claim 19, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 18, wherein the exit end of the auger is attached to an inlet housing that partially surrounds the suction inlet (Alton English translation, p. 6:27-36 and fig. 5, a vertical end section 30a or 30b [corresponds to the recited inlet housing] includes the suction portion 28a or 28b [corresponds to the recited suction inlet]. By combining with Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463 and Miller, the recited inlet housing would be disposed at the exit end of the auger).
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 the vacuum system of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton to provide the inlet housing as taught by Alton. The inlet housing can provide protection to the suction inlet by preventing it from being damaged when large waste collides with the suction inlet continuously during suctioning.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensch ‘894 in view of Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton, as applied to claim 18 above, and in further view of Mensch ‘985).
Regarding claim 20, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton teaches the vehicle as in the rejection of claim 18, but does not disclose a flexible member extends downward from the collector frame, the first operable arm, and the second operable arm to further define the collection area.
Mensch ‘985 teaches, in an analogous cleaning vehicle field of endeavor, a flexible member extends downward from the collector frame, the first operable arm, and the second operable arm to further define the collection area (fig. 4 and col. 2:47-66, a vehicle comprises a scraper assembly 20 comprising a frame and an upper edge 62 [corresponds to the recited operable arm]. A scraper element 26 extends downward from the frame and the arm of the scraper assembly 20; col. 6:58-61, the scraper element is resiliently flexible).
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 the operable arms of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, and Alton provide the flexible member as taught by Mensch ‘985. The flexible member allows significant amount of waste to be collected and pushed forward at a time (Mensch ‘985 col. 5:64-6:2).
Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, Alton, and Mensch ‘985 teaches the auger is attached to the collector frame above the flexible member, wherein a thread of the auger extends downward and into the collection area adjacent to the flexible member.
Mensch ‘463 as modified by Miller teaches the auger of Miller is attached to the collector frame of Mensch ‘463. A thread of auger extends into the collection area, and by combining with Mesch ‘985, the thread would be disposed adjacent the flexible scraper element.
However, Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, Alton, and Mensch ‘985 does not disclose the auger is attached to the collector frame above the flexible member.
However, as discussed above, Mesch ‘463 and Miller teach the auger is attached to the collector frame, and Mensch ‘985 teaches the flexible scraper element.
Then 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 the vehicle of Mensch ‘894 as modified by Mensch ‘463, Miller, Alton, and Mensch ‘985 to provide the auger attached above the flexible member. The flexible member needs to be placed in a low position so that the agitated waste by the auger does not escape the collection area. It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mensch (CA 2691711A1) discloses a vacuum truck for scraping debris and vacuuming them up. The truck has two scrapers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUKWOO JAMES CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00a-5:00p.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/SUKWOO JAMES CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights