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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 14-16, 22 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 6, 14, and 22, folding implements with forward extending lift-assist wheels and a trailing chassis assembly are known in the art. Hatcher discloses many of the claimed features including the folding wings, lift-assist assemblies, and even lift-assist assemblies partially aligned with the rear wheels of the tractor. Further, Green teaches a trailing chassis for the purpose of supporting a seed cart tank. However, neither of these references, nor any other reference, teaches the lift assist wheel fully aligned with the rear traction element of the tractor (as seen in Applicant’s Fig 11 with axis elements 158 and 160). Each of the above noted claims refers to the lift-assist wheel being “aligned” with the rear wheels of the tractor. Because there is no qualifier term (“generally aligned”, “at least partially aligned”) as used in other claims and in Applicant’s specification reference to Fig 2, the examiner interprets the lift-assist wheels being aligned with the rear wheels of the tractor to be in reference to Applicant’s Fig 11 with coaxial rotation axes of each the lift-assist wheels and tractor rear traction elements. In view of the prior art of record, any obvious combination to make the lift-assist wheels fully align with the tractor’s rear traction elements as currently claimed would certainly require improper hindsight reasoning.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7-9, 13, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hatcher (US 4206815).
Regarding claim 1, Hatcher discloses an agricultural implement extending in a fore-aft direction between a forward end and an aft end, the agricultural implement comprising:
a toolbar assembly comprising a central toolbar section and first and second wing toolbar sections pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section, the central toolbar section configured to be mounted to a work vehicle via a semi-mounted configuration (central toolbar 14; first and second wing toolbars 18L and 18R are pivotably coupled at 19L and 19R; Fig 3 depicts the central toolbar 14 mounted to work vehicle 11 in a semi-mounted configuration as that claim language is broad); and
first and second lift-assist assemblies pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section and extending outwardly therefrom in a forward direction of travel of the implement such that the lift-assist assemblies are positioned at forward end of the agricultural implement (Fig 2 depicts the lift assemblies 12 that are pivotably coupled to the central toolbar 14 and extending forward).
Regarding claim 5, Hatcher discloses the agricultural implement wherein each of the first and second lift-assist assemblies includes a support frame pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section and a lift-assist wheel coupled to the support frame for rotation relative thereto (see Annotated Figure 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
289
417
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 7, Hatcher discloses the agricultural implement further comprising a first wing support wheel coupled to the first wing toolbar section and a second wing support wheel coupled to the second wing toolbar section, the first and second wing support wheels being separate from the lift-assist wheels of the first and second lift-assist assemblies (Fig 2 depicts the wing sections raised and a wing support wheel 12 separate from the lift assist assembly).
Regarding claim 8, Hatcher discloses an agricultural system, comprising:
a work vehicle including first and second rear traction elements (work vehicle 11 with wheels depicted in Fig 2); and
an agricultural implement configured to be towed by the work vehicle, the agricultural implement comprising:
a toolbar assembly including a central toolbar section and first and second wing toolbar sections pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section, the central toolbar section configured to be mounted to the work vehicle via a semi-mounted configuration (central toolbar 14; first and second wing toolbars 18L and 18R are pivotably coupled at 19L and 19R; Fig 3 depicts the central toolbar 14 mounted to work vehicle 11 in a semi-mounted configuration as that claim language is broad); and
first and second lift-assist assemblies pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section and extending outwardly therefrom in a forward direction of travel of the agricultural implement such that the lift-assist assemblies are at least partially aligned with the first and second rear traction elements of the work vehicle in a lateral direction of the agricultural implement (Fig 2 depicts the lift assemblies 12 that are pivotably coupled to the central toolbar 14 and extending forward; claim language is broad; Fig 2 depicts the lift assemblies 12 overlaps with the wheels of the tractor 11 which is considered to be “at least partially aligned”).
Regarding claim 9, Hatcher discloses the agricultural system wherein the first and second rear traction elements comprise one of first and second rear wheels of the work vehicle or first and second rear track assemblies of the work vehicle (work vehicle 11 with wheels depicted in Fig 2).
Regarding claim 13, Hatcher discloses the agricultural system wherein each of the first and second lift-assist assemblies includes a support frame pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section and a lift-assist wheel coupled to the support frame for rotation relative thereto (see Annotated Figure 1).
Regarding claim 17, Hatcher discloses the agricultural system further comprising a first wing support wheel coupled to the first wing toolbar section and a second wing support wheel coupled to the second wing toolbar section, the first and second wing support wheels being separate from the lift-assist wheels of the first and second lift-assist assemblies (Fig 2 depicts the wing sections raised and a wing support wheel 12 separate from the lift assist assembly).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 2-4, 10-12, 18-21, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatcher in view of Green et al. (US 5485797).
Regarding claim 2, Hatcher fails to specifically disclose an articulating chassis assembly coupled to the toolbar assembly and being disposed in a trailing position relative to the toolbar assembly such that the chassis assembly is positioned at the aft end of the agricultural implement. However, implements using a trailing chassis is known; for example, Green (US 5485797) discloses a similar toolbar (16) and teaches an articulating chassis assembly being disposed in a trailing position relative to the toolbar and positioned at the aft end of the implement (articulating chassis 12 with trailing cart 10 at the aft end of the implement; Fig 4 depicts ball joint 40 which articulates).
Hatcher and Green are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of towing agricultural implements. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hatcher to incorporate the teachings of Green and combined the use of a trailing articulating chassis. One would have made this combination to couple a seed cart behind the cultivator (Green; col 1, lines 12-14).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Hatcher and Green discloses the agricultural implement wherein the chassis assembly is pivotably coupled to the toolbar assembly via a connecting frame, the connecting frame extending in the fore-aft direction between a forward frame end and an aft frame end, the forward frame end being pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section of the toolbar assembly, the aft frame end being coupled to the chassis assembly via an articulation joint (Green; Fig 4 depicts the connecting frame 32/42 extending in a fore-aft direction with the forward frame end pivotably coupled at joint 34 to the center of the toolbar and aft frame end coupled to the chassis assembly at joint 40).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Hatcher and Green discloses the agricultural implement wherein the chassis assembly comprises a support frame configured to support one or more storage tanks for storing an agricultural material (the chassis assembly comprises support frame 22 a tank of some kind to distribute the seed, fertilizer, and/or pesticide; Green, col 1, lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 10, Hatcher fails to specifically disclose an articulating chassis assembly coupled to the toolbar assembly and being disposed in a trailing position relative to the toolbar assembly. However, implements using a trailing chassis is known; for example, Green (US 5485797) discloses a similar toolbar (16) and teaches an articulating chassis assembly being disposed in a trailing position relative to the toolbar (articulating chassis 12 with trailing cart 10 at the aft end of the implement; Fig 4 depicts ball joint 40 which articulates).
Hatcher and Green are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of towing agricultural implements. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hatcher to incorporate the teachings of Green and combined the use of a trailing articulating chassis. One would have made this combination to couple a seed cart behind the cultivator (Green; col 1, lines 12-14).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Hatcher and Green discloses the agricultural system wherein the chassis assembly is pivotably coupled to the toolbar assembly via a connecting frame, the connecting frame extending in a fore-aft direction of the implement between a forward frame end and an aft frame end, the forward frame end being pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section of the toolbar assembly, the aft frame end being coupled to the chassis assembly via an articulation joint (Green; Fig 4 depicts the connecting frame 32/42 extending in a fore-aft direction with the forward frame end pivotably coupled at joint 34 to the center of the toolbar and aft frame end coupled to the chassis assembly at joint 40).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Hatcher and Green discloses the agricultural system wherein the chassis assembly comprises a support frame configured to support one or more storage tanks for storing an agricultural material (the chassis assembly comprises support frame 22 a tank of some kind to distribute the seed, fertilizer, and/or pesticide; Green, col 1, lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 18, Hatcher discloses an agricultural implement extending in a fore-aft direction between a forward end and an aft end, the agricultural implement comprising:
a toolbar assembly comprising a central toolbar section and first and second wing toolbar sections pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section (central toolbar 14; first and second wing toolbars 18L and 18R are pivotably coupled at 19L and 19R);
first and second lift-assist assemblies pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section and extending outwardly therefrom in a forward direction of travel of the implement such that the lift-assist assemblies are positioned at forward end of the agricultural implement (Fig 2 depicts the lift assemblies 12 that are pivotably coupled to the central toolbar 14 and extending forward); and
Hatcher fails to specifically disclose an articulating chassis assembly coupled to the toolbar assembly and being disposed in a trailing position relative to the toolbar assembly such that the chassis assembly is positioned at the aft end of the agricultural implement. However, implements using a trailing chassis is known; for example, Green (US 5485797) discloses a similar toolbar (16) and teaches an articulating chassis assembly being disposed in a trailing position relative to the toolbar and positioned at the aft end of the implement (articulating chassis 12 with trailing cart 10 at the aft end of the implement; Fig 4 depicts ball joint 40 which articulates).
Hatcher and Green are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of towing agricultural implements. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hatcher to incorporate the teachings of Green and combined the use of a trailing articulating chassis. One would have made this combination to couple a seed cart behind the cultivator (Green; col 1, lines 12-14).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Hatcher and Green discloses the agricultural implement wherein the chassis assembly is pivotably coupled to the toolbar assembly via a connecting frame, the connecting frame extending in the fore-aft direction between a forward frame end and an aft frame end, the forward frame end being pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section of the toolbar assembly, the aft frame end being coupled to the chassis assembly via an articulation joint (Green; Fig 4 depicts the connecting frame 32/42 extending in a fore-aft direction with the forward frame end pivotably coupled at joint 34 to the center of the toolbar and aft frame end coupled to the chassis assembly at joint 40).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Hatcher and Green discloses the agricultural implement wherein the chassis assembly comprises a support frame configured to support one or more storage tanks for storing an agricultural material (the chassis assembly comprises support frame 22 a tank of some kind to distribute the seed, fertilizer, and/or pesticide; Green, col 1, lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 21, Hatcher further discloses the agricultural implement wherein each of the first and second lift-assist assemblies includes a support frame pivotably coupled to the central toolbar section and a lift-assist wheel coupled to the support frame for rotation relative thereto (see Annotated Figure 1).
Regarding claim 23, Hatcher further discloses the agricultural implement further comprising a first wing support wheel coupled to the first wing toolbar section and a second wing support wheel coupled to the second wing toolbar section, the first and second wing support wheels being separate from the lift-assist wheels of the first and second lift-assist assemblies (Hatcher; Fig 2 depicts the wing sections raised and a wing support wheel 12 separate from the lift assist assembly).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
DeKam (US 20190239414) discloses a similar towed agricultural implement to the claimed invention. DeKam shows forwardly extending lift-assist assemblies (64) with a seed cart assembly (24). However, the seed cart is not trailing the toolbar and the lift-assist assemblies are not aligned with the tractor wheels, but are aligned with traction element on the seed cart.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE SCOVILLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30-6 (ET).
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at (571) 272-0547. 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.
/BLAKE E SCOVILLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights