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 .
Specification
The abstract was received on 11/17/2025. The abstract is acceptable.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 11/17/2025. These drawings are acceptable.
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.
Claim 11, line 4, recites “means for heating water” and is being interpreted under 112(f). The “means” is understood to be heating means 12 as per page 5 of the specification describing “water can be heated by making it pass through a heat exchanger, for example a coil, positioned in a diesel oil or gas boiler.” This treatment similarly applies to further recitations in claims 12 and 13.
3-prong analysis:
The claim limitation uses the term “means” for performing the claimed function; “means”
The term “means” is modified by functional language, “for heating water”
The term “means” is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function; “means” is not modified by sufficient structure in claim 11
Claim 11, line 7, recites “means for generating forced air” and is being interpreted under 112(f). The “means” is understood to be electric fans 14, 14’ as per page 10 of the specification describing “Preferably, the forced air generating means comprise one or more electric fans 14, 14'.”
3-prong analysis:
The claim limitation uses the term “means” for performing the claimed function; “means”
The term “means” is modified by functional language, “for generating forced air”
The term “means” is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function; “means” is not modified by sufficient structure in claim 11
Claim 11, line 8, recites “means for heating the forced air” and is being interpreted under 112(f). The “means” is understood to be heating means 15, 15’ as per page 5 of the specification describing “For example, the forced air, for example produced by a suitable fan, can be heated efficiently using electric heating elements appropriately positioned in the duct for forced air downstream of the forced air generating means.” T
3-prong analysis:
The claim limitation uses the term “means” for performing the claimed function; “means”
The term “means” is modified by functional language, “heating the forced air”
The term “means” is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function; “means” is not modified by sufficient structure in claim 11
Claim 11, line 12, recites “second conveying means for conveying the water” and is being interpreted under 112(f). The “second conveying means” is understood to be the pipe of second conveying means 21 as per page 9 of the specification describing “second conveying means 21 (for example a pipe made of a suitable material) of said water.”
3-prong analysis:
The claim limitation uses the term “means” for performing the claimed function; “second conveying means”
The term “means” is modified by functional language, “for conveying the water”
The term “means” is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function; “second conveying means” is not modified by sufficient structure in claim 11
Claim 11, line 15, recites “means for transferring the foaming substance” and is being interpreted under 112(f). The “means” is understood to be transfer means 22 as per page 10 of the specification describing “through transfer means 22 of said foaming substance, for example formed by a pipe made of suitable material provided with specific pumping devices.”
3-prong analysis:
The claim limitation uses the term “means” for performing the claimed function; “means”
The term “means” is modified by functional language, “for transferring the foaming substance”
The term “means” is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function; “means” is not modified by sufficient structure in claim 11
Claim 20, lines 1 and 2, recites “means of transport” and is being interpreted under 112(f). The “means” is understood to be a tractor, truck, or other self-propelled vehicle as per page 8 of the specification describing “For this purpose, the equipment can advantageously comprise means for operational coupling with a means of transport, particularly with a farm tractor” and “For example, it is possible for the equipment to be assembled on a truck or other self-propelled vehicle for other uses.”
3-prong analysis:
The claim limitation uses the term “means” for performing the claimed function; “means”
The term “means” is modified by functional language, “of transport”
The term “means” is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function; “means” is not modified by sufficient structure in claim 20
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.
Claims 11 and 15-20 are 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.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the grass” in line 24. There is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation. Examiner recommends revision to “grass.”
Dependent claims 15-20 fail to remedy the deficiencies.
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.
Claims 11, 15, 16, 19, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cowan et al. (US 20210169063 A1), hereinafter Cowan, in view of Reddy et al. (US 20100129157 A1), hereinafter Reddy.
Regarding claim 11, Cowan discloses an apparatus for mobile weed control and/or desuckering of tree crops (weed control apparatus 10; Fig. 1), the apparatus comprising:
means for heating water (boiler 23; Fig. 1);
a foaming substance containment tank (bottle/jar 20; Fig. 1);
means for generating forced air (air blower 14; Fig. 1);
a foam generating device (nozzle 32; Fig. 2);
a forced air duct connecting the means for generating forced air to the foam generating device (Fig. 2 shows forced air duct extending from nozzle 32, along duct 30 and venturi 34, and to valve 42);
second conveying means for conveying the water from the means for heating the water to the forced air duct at a point upstream of the foam generating device and downstream of the means for heating the forced air (flexible hose 22; Fig. 1 shows flexible hose 22 and duct to venturi 34 is a conveying means for the water);
means for transferring the foaming substance from the foaming substance containment tank to the second conveying means (duct 36; Fig. 1);
a first injection device configured to inject a mixture of water and foaming substance from the second conveying means into the forced air duct (venturi constriction 34; Fig. 2);
means for distribution of the foam (annular nozzle structure 25; Fig. 1); and
control means (¶ 0025, lines 2-5, “The solenoid-controlled valve 42 is controlled by a microprocessor or a timer [not shown] that may be within the cylindrical body 12”),
a third conveying means of said water connecting a point of said second conveying means upstream of an inlet of the means for transferring the foaming substance with said forced air duct at a point downstream of the means for heating the forced air upstream of the first injection device (Fig. 2 shows the duct portion between control valve 42 connection to flexible hose 22 and venturi connection 34 is a third conveying means located downstream of blower 14 and upstream of duct 36 connection to venturi 34); and
one or more devices downstream of the foam generating device and configured to lower the grass and convey the foam so as to form a covering of a constant height (chute 26; Fig. 1 shows chute 26 is configured to lower grass if contact is made, and configured to convey at constant height if device is held at constant height from ground).
Cowan, however, fails to specifically disclose a water containment tank and water conveyed via first conveying means from a water containment tank, and a means for heating the forced air, wherein the means for heating the forced air is positioned in the forced air duct.
Reddy is in the field of treatment using forced air and water and teaches a water containment tank (fluid reservoir 216; Fig. 7) and water conveyed via first conveying means from a water containment tank (feed line 218; Fig. 7), and a means for heating the forced air, wherein the means for heating the forced air is positioned in the forced air duct (gas heater 10; Fig. 7 shows gas heater 10 is situated in casing 210), and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of treatment using forced air and water before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Cowan to include a water containment tank and water conveyed via first conveying means from a water containment tank and a means for heating the forced air, wherein the means for heating the forced air is positioned in the forced air duct, as taught by the water supply and forced air heater of Reddy. The reservoir would ensure an adequate supply of water for use, and the forced air heater would increase the temperature of the air generated, which would improve treatment capabilities and the overall function of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 15, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the device of claim 11.
Cowan discloses comprising a second injection device configured to inject water from the third conveying means into the forced air duct (valve 42; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 16, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the device of claim 15.
Cowan discloses wherein the first injection device and/or the second injection device comprises one or more nebulizing/atomizing nozzles of the mixture of water and foaming substance and/or of the water (mist nozzle 32; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the device of claim 11.
Cowan discloses wherein the first injection device comprises one or more nebulizing/atomizing nozzles of the mixture of water and foaming substance and/or of the water (mist nozzle 32; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 22, Cowan discloses a method of operating an apparatus for mobile weed control and/or desuckering of tree crops (weed control apparatus 10; Fig. 1), the method comprising:
wherein the water is heated (boiler 23; Fig. 1);
conveying heated water from the first heating area (boiler 23; Fig. 1) and simultaneously introducing a foaming substance from a second containment tank to the heated water from the first heating area (¶ 0013, lines 1-10, “The foam-generating device may comprise an air blower connected to an air duct, with a liquid spray nozzle within the air duct. A flow duct to carry water leads via a venturi constriction to the spray nozzle, and a second duct communicates between a vessel to contain a concentrate for the aqueous solution and the venturi constriction, so that water flowing through the flow duct causes the concentrate to be sucked into the water flow at the venturi constriction, so that a diluted aqueous solution is then sprayed through the spray nozzle to mix with the airflow and form foam”);
further wherein the duct connects at an output into a foam generator (Fig. 2 shows forced air duct extending from nozzle 32, along duct 30 and venturi 34, and to valve 42);
conveying water from a point of the heated water upstream of where the foaming substance is introduced, into the duct via a third input at a point downstream of the second heating area and upstream of a second input (Fig. 2 shows the duct portion between control valve 42 connection to flexible hose 22 and venturi connection 34 is located downstream of blower 14 and upstream of duct 36 connection to venturi 34); and
injecting a mixture of foaming substance and heated water from the first heating area into the duct via a second input, at a point upstream of the foam generator and downstream of the second heating area (¶ 0013, lines 1-10; Fig. 1 shows flexible hose 22 and duct to venturi 34 is a conveying means for the water); and
distributing foam from the foam generator (foam 46; Fig. 1), using one or more devices for lowering grass and conveying the foam (chute 26; Fig. 1).
Cowan, however, fails to specifically disclose conveying water from a first containment tank of the apparatus to a first heating area, and forcing air via a first input into a duct comprising a second heating area wherein the forced air is heated.
Reddy teaches conveying water from a first containment tank of the apparatus to a first heating area (fluid reservoir 216, feed line 218; Fig. 7), and forcing air via a first input into a duct comprising a second heating area wherein the forced air is heated (gas heater 10; Fig. 7 shows gas heater 10 is situated in casing 210).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of treatment using forced air and water before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan to include conveying water from a first containment tank of the apparatus to a first heating area, and forcing air via a first input into a duct comprising a second heating area wherein the forced air is heated, as taught by the water supply and forced air heater of Reddy. The reservoir would ensure an adequate supply of water for use, and the forced air heater would increase the temperature of the air generated, which would improve treatment capabilities and the overall function of the method. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 24, 25, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cowan (US 20210169063 A1) and Reddy (US 20100129157 A1), and further in view of Hobbs et al. (US 9426974 B2), hereinafter Hobbs.
Regarding claim 24, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the method of claim 22, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose further comprising controlling switching on/switching off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to calculated on/off cycles.
Hobbs teaches further comprising controlling switch on/switch off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to calculated on/off cycles (Col. 4, lines 14-31).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include controlling switch on/switch off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to calculated on/off cycles, as taught by the heater control of Hobbs. This would allow for more precise control over temperature of water being supplied, which would improve overall function of the method. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 25, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the method of claim 22, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose further comprising controlling switch on/switch off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to on/off cycles calculated in real time as a function of an inlet temperature of the water into the first heating area, and/or an outlet temperature of the water from the first heating area, and/or a desired temperature of water delivered from the first heating area.
Hobbs teaches further comprising controlling switch on/switch off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to on/off cycles calculated in real time as a function of an inlet temperature of the water into the first heating area, and/or an outlet temperature of the water from the first heating area, and/or a desired temperature of water delivered from the first heating area (Col. 4, lines 14-31).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include controlling switch on/switch off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to on/off cycles calculated in real time as a function of an inlet temperature of the water into the first heating area, and/or an outlet temperature of the water from the first heating area, and/or a desired temperature of water delivered from the first heating area, as taught by the heater control of Hobbs. This would allow for more precise control over temperature of water being supplied, which would improve overall function of the method. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 30, Cowan discloses a method of operating an apparatus for mobile weed control and/or desuckering of tree crops (weed control apparatus 10; Fig. 1), the method comprising:
conveying heated water from the first heating area (boiler 23; Fig. 1) and simultaneously introducing a foaming substance from a second containment tank to the heated water from the first heating area (¶ 0013, lines 1-10);
further wherein the duct connects at an output into a foam generator (Fig. 2 shows forced air duct extending from nozzle 32, along duct 30 and venturi 34, and to valve 42);
injecting a mixture of foaming substance and heated water from the first heating area into the duct via a second input, at a point upstream of the foam generator and downstream of the second heating area (¶ 0013, lines 1-10; Fig. 1 shows flexible hose 22 and duct to venturi 34 is a conveying means for the water);
distributing foam from the foam generator (foam 46; Fig. 1); and
Cowan, however, fails to specifically disclose conveying water from a first containment tank of the apparatus to a first heating area, wherein the water is heated, and forcing air via a first input into a duct comprising a second heating area wherein the forced air is heated, as well as controlling a switching on/switching off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to on/off cycles calculated in real time as a function of an inlet temperature of the water into the first heating area, and/or an outlet temperature of the water from the first heating area, and/or a desired temperature of water delivered from the first heating area.
Reddy teaches conveying water from a first containment tank of the apparatus to a first heating area, wherein the water is heated (fluid reservoir 216, feed line 218; Fig. 7), and forcing air via a first input into a duct comprising a second heating area wherein the forced air is heated (gas heater 10; Fig. 7 shows gas heater 10 is situated in casing 210).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of treatment using forced air and water before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan to include conveying water from a first containment tank of the apparatus to a first heating area, and forcing air via a first input into a duct comprising a second heating area wherein the forced air is heated, as taught by the water supply and forced air heater of Reddy. The reservoir would ensure an adequate supply of water for use, and the forced air heater would increase the temperature of the air generated, which would improve treatment capabilities and the overall function of the method. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Hobbs teaches further comprising controlling a switching on/switching off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to on/off cycles calculated in real time as a function of an inlet temperature of the water into the first heating area, and/or an outlet temperature of the water from the first heating area, and/or a desired temperature of water delivered from the first heating area (Col. 4, lines 14-31).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include controlling a switching on/switching off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to on/off cycles calculated in real time as a function of an inlet temperature of the water into the first heating area, and/or an outlet temperature of the water from the first heating area, and/or a desired temperature of water delivered from the first heating area, as taught by the heater control of Hobbs. This would allow for more precise control over temperature of water being supplied, which would improve overall function of the method. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 17, 18, 20, 23, and 26-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cowan (US 20210169063 A1) and Reddy (US 20100129157 A1), and further in view of Swan et al. (US 20170202203 A1), hereinafter Swan.
Regarding claim 17, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the device of claim 11, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose comprising a first recirculation line of the water from the second water conveying means to the water containment tank.
Swan is in the field of weed control and teaches comprising a first recirculation line of the water from the second water conveying means to the water containment tank (water storage tank 14, pressure relief duct 74, medium-pressure relief valve 75; Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Cowan in view of Reddy to include a first recirculation line of the water from the second water conveying means to the water containment tank, as taught by the recirculation system of Swan. This would allow for water conservation within the system as well as pressure regulation, which would improve the overall operation of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 18, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the device of claim 11, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose comprising a second water recirculation line of the water from the first water conveying means to the water containment tank.
Swan teaches comprising a second water recirculation line of the water from the first water conveying means to the water containment tank (water storage tank 14, pressure relief duct 50, high-pressure relief valve 52; Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Cowan in view of Reddy to include a second water recirculation line of the water from the first water conveying means to the water containment tank, as taught by the recirculation system of Swan. This would allow for water conservation within the system as well as pressure regulation, which would improve the overall operation of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 20, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the device of claim 11, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose wherein the apparatus is operationally coupled with a means of transport and comprises one or more devices downstream of the foam generating device, positioned laterally to the means of transport and configured to dispense the foam in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the means of transport.
Swan teaches wherein the apparatus is operationally coupled with a means of transport (pickup truck 12; Fig. 1) and comprises one or more devices downstream of the foam generating device, positioned laterally to the means of transport and configured to dispense the foam in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the means of transport (Fig. 1 shows lances 24 positioned laterally to the means of transport and configured to dispense the foam in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Cowan in view of Reddy such that the device is operationally coupled with a means of transport and comprises one or more devices downstream of the foam generating device, positioned laterally to the means of transport and configured to dispense the foam in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the means of transport, as taught by the vehicle and lance structure of Swan. This would allow for the device to be transported more effectively, which would improve the overall operation of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 23, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the method of claim 22, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose wherein the apparatus is mounted on a transport vehicle, and wherein foam generator is positioned laterally with respect to the transport vehicle and the foam is distributed from the foam generator in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the transport vehicle.
Swan teaches wherein the apparatus is mounted on a transport vehicle (pickup truck 12; Fig. 1), and wherein foam generator is positioned laterally with respect to the transport vehicle and the foam is distributed from the foam generator in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the transport vehicle (Fig. 1 shows lances 24 to generate foam positioned laterally perpendicular to a direction of travel of the truck 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include the apparatus is mounted on a transport vehicle, and wherein foam generator is positioned laterally with respect to the transport vehicle and the foam is distributed from the foam generator in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the transport vehicle, as taught by the vehicle of Swan. This would allow for the device to be transported more effectively, which would improve the overall operation of the method. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 26, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the method of claim 22, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first heating area and prior to injection into the duct via the second input, to the first containment tank.
Swan teaches comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first heating area and prior to injection into the duct via the second input, to the first containment tank (water storage tank 14, pressure relief duct 74, medium-pressure relief valve 75; Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first heating area and prior to injection into the duct via the second input, to the first containment tank, as taught by the recirculation system of Swan. This would allow for water conservation within the system as well as pressure regulation, which would improve the overall operation of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 27, Cowan in view of Reddy and Swan discloses the method of claim 26, and furthermore, the modified reference teaches wherein the recirculating step is performed during a pre-heating process and until a predetermined operating temperature is reached (Swan; ¶ 0007, lines 7-12, “Until such time as the heater heats the water to the desired temperature, the water will be recirculated through the pressure relief valve back to the water storage tank, but when the water reaches the desired temperature the control valve will open, and the resulting hot water will be supplied to the hoses”).
Regarding claim 28, Cowan in view of Reddy discloses the method of claim 22, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first containment tank and prior to the first heating area, to the first containment tank.
Swan teaches comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first containment tank and prior to the first heating area, to the first containment tank (water storage tank 14, pressure relief duct 74, medium-pressure relief valve 75; Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first containment tank and prior to the first heating area, to the first containment tank, as taught by the recirculation system of Swan. This would allow for water conservation within the system as well as pressure regulation, which would improve the overall operation of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 29, Cowan in view of Reddy and Swan discloses the method of claim 28, and furthermore, the modified reference teaches wherein the recirculating step is performed during an interruption in the mobile weed control and/or desuckering operations, further wherein heating of the water in the first heating area is temporarily disabled (Swan; ¶ 0020, lines 3-12, “If there were to be a blockage in the water heater 16, this would be detected either by an increase in pressure as sensed by the pressure sensor 48 or a decrease in flow as detected by the flow sensor 46; and in either case the controller 30 may stop the operation of the water heater 16. The high-pressure relief valve 52 is arranged to open if the water pressure exceeds a safety limit [for example 40 bar=4.0 MPa], so the pressure is relieved, and the excess water can return to the water return circuit 54”).
Claims 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cowan (US 20210169063 A1), Reddy (US 20100129157 A1), and Hobbs (US 9426974 B2), and further in view of Swan (US 20170202203 A1).
Regarding claim 31, Cowan in view of Reddy and Hobbs discloses the method of claim 30, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose wherein the apparatus is mounted on a transport vehicle, and wherein the foam generator is positioned laterally with respect to the transport vehicle and the foam is distributed from the foam generator in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the transport vehicle.
Swan teaches wherein the apparatus is mounted on a transport vehicle (pickup truck 12; Fig. 1) and wherein the foam generator is positioned laterally with respect to the transport vehicle and the foam is distributed from the foam generator in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the transport vehicle (Fig. 1 shows lances 24 positioned laterally to the means of transport and configured to dispense the foam in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy such that the apparatus is mounted on a transport vehicle, and wherein the foam generator is positioned laterally with respect to the transport vehicle and the foam is distributed from the foam generator in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel of the transport vehicle, as taught by the vehicle and lance structure of Swan. This would allow for the device to be transported more effectively, which would improve the overall operation of the method. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 32, Cowan in view of Reddy and Hobbs discloses the method of claim 30, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first heating area and prior to injection into the duct via the second input, to the first containment tank; wherein the recirculating step is performed during a pre-heating process and until a predetermined operating temperature is reached.
Swan teaches comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first heating area and prior to injection into the duct via the second input, to the first containment tank (water storage tank 14, pressure relief duct 74, medium-pressure relief valve 75; Fig. 2); wherein the recirculating step is performed during a pre-heating process and until a predetermined operating temperature is reached (Swan; ¶ 0007, lines 7-12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first heating area and prior to injection into the duct via the second input, to the first containment tank, wherein the recirculating step is performed during a pre-heating process and until a predetermined operating temperature is reached, as taught by the recirculation system of Swan. This would allow for water conservation within the system as well as pressure regulation, which would improve the overall operation of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 33, Cowan in view of Reddy and Hobbs discloses the method of claim 30, however, the modified reference fails to specifically disclose comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first containment tank and prior to the first heating area, to the first containment tank; wherein the recirculating step is performed during an interruption in the mobile weed control and/or desuckering operations, further wherein heating of the water in the first heating area is temporarily disabled.
Swan teaches comprising recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first containment tank and prior to the first heating area, to the first containment tank (water storage tank 14, pressure relief duct 74, medium-pressure relief valve 75; Fig. 2); wherein the recirculating step is performed during an interruption in the mobile weed control and/or desuckering operations, further wherein heating of the water in the first heating area is temporarily disabled (Swan; ¶ 0020, lines 3-12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of weed control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Cowan in view of Reddy to include recirculating of water, having been conveyed from the first containment tank and prior to the first heating area, to the first containment tank; wherein the recirculating step is performed during an interruption in the mobile weed control and/or desuckering operations, further wherein heating of the water in the first heating area is temporarily disabled., as taught by the recirculation system of Swan. This would allow for water conservation within the system as well as pressure regulation, which would improve the overall operation of the device. The modification would have a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument on pages 13 and 14 that “However, Cowan teaches only a single water path where the flexible hose connects to a solenoid-controlled valve within the cylindrical body, and a duct leads from the control valve to the mist spray nozzle, with the duct including a venturi constriction where the concentrate is sucked from the bottle into the water flow. This single water path cannot satisfy both the ‘second conveying means’ and the ‘third conveying means’ as recited by amended claim 11. The claimed apparatus requires a dual water path system where the third conveying means provides a separate connection point upstream of the foaming substance inlet, which is structurally distinct from Cowan's single water injection system,” and “Cowan discloses that a pipe leads from the solenoid-controlled valve to the annular nozzle structure, with the annular nozzle structure being arranged to allow water to emerge as a blade or flat jet from the upper part of the annular nozzle structure so as to impact on the lower part of the annular nozzle structure and on the top end of the open-topped chute. Cowan [0025]. In operation, after a predetermined time period set by the microprocessor or timer, the air blower stops, so ceasing the supply of foam, and the timer operates the solenoid-controlled valve so that the hot water from the flexible hose flows through the pipe to the annular nozzle structure, so it sprays onto the upper surface of the open-topped chute. Cowan [0026]. This teaches injecting hot water downstream into already-formed foam, not providing a separate upstream water path as required by the ‘third conveying means’ limitation of amended claim 11,” the Examiner submits that Cowan teaches multiple water paths as claimed by the Applicant, including a second conveying means through flexible hose 22, as well as a third conveying means through duct portion between control valve 42 connection and venturi connection 34, these conveying means are separate structures for the conveying of water. Additionally, the third conveying means is located upstream the duct 36 and venturi 34. Therefore, the claimed conveying structure is disclosed by Cowan.
Regarding the argument on page 14 that “Cowan discloses only an open-topped chute that directs foam toward vegetation and allows hot water to run down into the foam, which does not teach or suggest devices specifically configured for lowering grass and conveying foam to form a covering of constant height,” the Examiner submits that claim 11 recites “one or more devices downstream of the foam generating device and configured to lower the grass and convey the foam so as to form a covering of a constant height,” and since Fig. 1 of Cowan shows chute 26 is configured to lower grass if contact is made, and configured to convey at constant height if device is held at constant height from ground, the grass lowering and foam conveying aspects of claim 11 are disclosed by Cowan as claimed.
Regarding the argument on page 16 that “Hobbs teaches only simple thermostat and bimetallic switch controls that operate based on single temperature thresholds, not real-time calculated variable cycles based on multiple temperature inputs including inlet temperature, outlet temperature, and desired delivery temperature. The real-time computational control algorithm recited by claims 24 and 25 requires dynamic calculation of on/off cycles based on multiple temperature parameters, which is fundamentally different from Hobbs' basic threshold switching that merely turns heating elements on or off when predetermined temperature limits are reached. Claims 24 and 25 are believed to be allowable, as the cited combination fails to disclose the real-time calculated control algorithm that dynamically determines on/off cycles based on multiple temperature parameters,” the Examiner submits that the above argument is incommensurate with the scope of the claims, as the claims do not recite the argued “real-time calculated control algorithm that dynamically determines on/off cycles based on multiple temperature parameters.” Instead, claims 24 and 25 recite “a switching on/switching off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to calculated on/off cycles,” and “controlling a switching on/switching off of the heating of the water in the first heating area according to on/off cycles calculated in real time as a function of an inlet temperature of the water into the first heating area, and/or an outlet temperature of the water from the first heating area, and/or a desired temperature of water delivered from the first heating area.” Hobbs teaches this claimed structure, as Col. 4, lines 14-31 of Hobbs demonstrate that a switching on/switching off of the heating of the water occurs in the first heating area according to a calculated maximum temperature. When the temperature of the liquid reaches the required temperature, the heating is switched off in real time as a function of the aforementioned liquid temperature. Therefore, the claimed switching on/switching off is taught by Hobbs.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure.
Rajamannan, US 5575111 A, discusses a method of using hot air foam to kill vegetation and pests.
Higham et al., US 20060188241 A1, discusses a fluid heater.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SPENCER THOMAS CALLAWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-3512. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached on 571-270-5301. 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.
/S.T.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642