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 statements (IDS) submitted on September 20, 2024 and February 3, 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 10-13, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ollinger, IV et al. (USP 9,963,853).
Regarding claim 1: Ollinger discloses a bucket lip (as seen in figures 1-15, generally 10) comprising:
an elongate one-piece casting (column 3, line 3) including an upper lip side (as seen in figure 2, area of 46) having an upper lip surface extending in a lateral direction between a first lateral edge and a second lateral edge (as seen in figure 2, area of 22 and 24), and in a fore-aft direction between a forward lip edge (as seen in figure 1, area of 20) and a back lip edge (as seen in figure 2, area of 16), and
a lower lip side (as seen in figure 3, area of 32);
a first lip wing (as seen in figure 2, area of 45, left hand side) projecting upward at a location adjacent to the first lateral edge;
a second lip wing (as seen in figure 2, area of 45, right hand side) projecting upward at a location adjacent to the second lateral edge; and the first lip wing and the second lip wing each having an outboard transition surface defining a smaller radius of curvature, and an inboard transition surface defining a larger radius of curvature and transitioning to the upper lip surface (as seen in annotated figure 7 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
202
147
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2: Ollinger discloses the bucket lip of claim 1. Further, Ollinger discloses wherein the first lip wing and the second lip wing each include a planar outboard surface located above the respective outboard transition surface, and a planar inboard surface located above the respective inboard transition surface (as seen in annotated figure 7 above).
Regarding claim 4: Ollinger discloses the bucket lip of claim 1. Further, Ollinger discloses wherein the inboard transition surface extends from the planar inboard surface to the upper lip surface (as seen in annotated figure above), and the larger radius of curvature includes a compound radius of curvature (inherently present in that the curvature “straightens out” at the planar surface).
Regarding claim 8: Ollinger discloses the bucket lip of claim 1. Further, Ollinger discloses wherein the first lip wing and the second lip wing each include a front surface sloped back upwardly away from the forward lip edge and having a curved profile matched, in part, to curvatures of each of the outboard transition surface and the inboard transition surface (as seen in figures 2 and 4A).
Regarding claims 10 and 11: Ollinger discloses the bucket lip of claim 1. Further, Ollinger discloses wherein each of the first lip wing and the second lip wing is formed integrally in the elongate once-piece casting (as seen in figures 2 and 3), and further comprising a plurality of mounting stations arranged along the front lip edge (as seen in figure 2, at 26) and wherein the plurality of mounting stations includes a first endmost station adjacent to the first lateral edge (as seen in figures 1 and 2, area of 45, left side) and a second endmost station adjacent to the second lateral edge (as seen in figures 1 and 2, area of 45, right), and the first lip wing and the second lip wing are intersected by a vertical midplane defined by the first endmost station and a vertical midplane defined by the second endmost station, respectively.
Regarding claim 12: Ollinger discloses a bucket lip (as seen in figures 1-15, generally 10) comprising:
an elongate one-piece casting (column 3, line 3) including an upper lip surface (as seen in figure 2, area of 46), a first lateral edge, a second lateral edge (as seen in figure 2, area of 22 and 24), a forward lip edge (as seen in figure 1, area of 20) and a back lip edge (as seen in figure 2, area of 16),
a first lip wing (as seen in figure 2, area of 45, left hand side) projecting upward at a location adjacent to the first lateral edge;
a second lip wing (as seen in figure 2, area of 45, right hand side) projecting upward at a location adjacent to the second lateral edge;
and the first lip wing and the second lip wing each having a base section attached to the upper lip surface, and a bucket wing attachment section extending upwardly from the respective base section; and the base section in each of the first lip wing and the second lip wing is laterally asymmetric about a midplane defined by the respective bucket attachment section (as seen in annotated figure 7 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
271
131
media_image2.png
Greyscale
. Regarding claims 13 and 15-17: Ollinger discloses the bucket lip of claim 12. Further, Ollinger discloses wherein each respective bucket wing attachment section includes an outboard boss-mounting surface that is planar, and each respective base section includes an outboard transition surface that is curved, wherein each respective base section includes an inboard transition surface that is curved and transitions to the upper lip surface and wherein each outboard transition surface defines a smaller radius of curvature, and each inboard transition surface defines a larger radius of curvature. (as seen in annotated figures 7 above and below).
PNG
media_image1.png
202
147
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 3, 5-7, 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ollinger, IV et al. (USP 9,963,853).
Regarding claims 3 and 14: Ollinger discloses the bucket lip as claimed substantially as discussed above but fails to show the relative proportions of the boss mounting/planar surfaces. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the vertical height limitation disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claims 5-7 and 9: Ollinger discloses the bucket lip as claimed substantially as discussed above but fails to show the varying radius of curvatures as claimed by the applicant. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the various radius of curvature limitations disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Churchill et al. (USPGPub 2020/0308804).
Regarding claims 18-20: Churchill discloses a cast bucket lip assembly (as seen in figures 1-5) and within the disclosure incorporates the above Ollinger, IV et al. (USP 9,963,853) reference (page 3, paragraph [0042]) which therein incorporates the respective relative surfaces, base structure, radius of curvatures and asymmetry as discussed above. Also, Churchill discusses the use of bosses and to employ them as needed and where desired on the cast lip to assist in the stability of allied wear parts (page 2, paragraph (0028]). Lastly Churchill discloses the assembly including a plurality of coupler mounting stations in an alternating arrangement with a plurality of shroud stations along the forward lip edge (as seen in figures 4 and 5), and further comprising a first bucket side wing attached to the first lip wing and a second bucket side wing attached to the second lip wing (as seen in figures 4 and 5, area of 109).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Drager et al. (USP D631,490). Discloses a single piece lip member employing wing bosses.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT ERIC PEZZUTO whose telephone number is (703)756-1320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph M. Rocca can be reached at 571-272-8971. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ROBERT E PEZZUTO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights