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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/911,902 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both claim a system for controlling operation of one or more float arms of an agricultural header using a first valve for positioning the float arm in locked and unlocked configurations through the valve having first and second positions transmitting first and second pressurized fluids. The claims of the copending application appear to be only narrower than those presented in the instant application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Para. [0041], line 2 recites “actuator 308”, should read – actuator 312 – due to earlier mention of the actuator in line 1.
Para. [0041], line 8 recites “actuator 226”, should read – actuator 312 –. Lines 9, 12, 14, 15, and 26 recite the same issue and are objected to as well.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 and 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 3 recites “connected to frame of “, should read – connected to a frame of –.
Claim 1, line 4 recites “secured in retracted position”, should read – secured in a retracted position –.
Claim 1, line 5 recites “retraced position”, should read – retracted position –.
Claim 5, line 2 recites “block passage of first fluid”, should read – block passage of the first fluid –.
Appropriate correction is required.
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(s) 1-10 and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coers et al. (US 7520115 B2) in view of Hunt et al. (US 12376522 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Coers et al. discloses a system (system of Figs. 3-4) for controlling operation of one or more float arms [114a-j] of an agricultural header [100], the system comprising:
a float arm ([114h], see Fig. 3) pivotably connected to frame [112] of the agricultural header, the float arm moveable between a locked configuration (accumulator [133] is completely filled with fluid, causing an up-force on the arm, raising it to the farthest point from ground and holding it in place until fluid is emptied, see Col. 6, lines 44-57) in which the float arm is secured in retracted position (displaced from the ground due to the up-force, see Col. 6, lines 44-57) and an unlocked configuration (accumulator is emptied, removing the up-force on the arm, see Col. 6, lines 44-57) in which the float arm is released from the retraced position (removal of the up-force causes the arm to drop towards the ground, see Col. 6, lines 44-57);
a first valve [135] movable between a first position (closed to maintain fluid within accumulator, see Col. 6, lines 44-57 and Col. 7, lines 35-38) configured to cause the float arm to move to the locked configuration and a second position (opened to release fluid within accumulator, see Col. 6, lines 44-57 and Col. 7, lines 35-38) configured to cause the float arm to move to the unlocked configuration;
a first source of pressurized fluid [137] in communication with the first valve, the first source of pressurized fluid including a first fluid at a first fluid pressure (hydraulic fluid provided with a fluid pressure, see Col. 6, lines 42-48).
But Coers et al. fails to disclose a second source of pressurized fluid in communication with the first valve, the second source of pressurized fluid including a second fluid at a second fluid pressure, the first valve, in the first position, being configured to transmit the first fluid from the first source and, in response, to cause the float arm to move to the locked configuration and, in the second position, configured to transmit the second fluid from the second fluid source and, in response, cause the float arm to move to the unlocked configuration.
Hunt et al. discloses a similar system (system of Figs. 3-6) for controlling an agricultural header [112], the header moveable between a locked configuration (fluid from first section [562] is inserted into the lift cylinder [510], increasing the pressure and moving the header to be fully lifted, locked in place until fluid is transferred, see Col. 6, lines 25-28 and Fig. 4) in which the header is secured in retracted position (displaced from the ground due to the increased pressure, see Fig. 4) and an unlocked configuration (both fluid sources [562 and 706] flow into the lift cylinder [510], allowing for position adjustment through floating, see Col. 6, lines 35-49 and Fig. 3) in which the header is released from the retraced position (released from being fully lifted and therefore can float, see Fig. 3);
a first valve [660] movable between a first position ([672], fluid flow is enabled from the source [562] to the lift cylinder, moving the header to the locked configuration, see Col. 6, lines 17-28 and Col. 8, lines 24-35) configured to cause the header to move to the locked configuration and a second position ([674], fluid is removed from the lift cylinder but balanced through flow restrictor [694] to maintain the floating, unlocked configuration, see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 44-54) enables fluid to flow from configured to cause the header to move to the unlocked configuration;
a first source of pressurized fluid [652] in communication with the first valve (fluid moves through the first valve to reach the lift cylinder, see Col. 9, lines 18-23), the first source of pressurized fluid including a first fluid at a first fluid pressure (hydraulic fluid provided with a fluid pressure, see Col. 7, lines 21-28); and
a second source of pressurized fluid [706] in communication with the first valve (communicates with first valve through how much second fluid is allowed to enter/leave the lift cylinder based on the amount of first fluid entering/leaving through the first valve, see Col. 9, lines 30-35 and 59-63), the second source of pressurized fluid including a second fluid at a second fluid pressure (hydraulic fluid provided with a fluid pressure, see Col. 9, lines 30-35 and 59-63),
the first valve, in the first position, being configured to transmit the first fluid from the first source and, in response, to cause the header to move to the locked configuration (fluid is allowed through the first valve, raising the header to the locked configuration, see Col. 6, lines 17-28 and Col. 8, lines 24-35), in the second position, configured to transmit the second fluid from the second fluid source and, in response, cause the header to move to the unlocked configuration (fluid is enable to flow from the lift cylinder back through the valve and flow restrictor [694], allowing for more fluid from the second source to enter for floating of the header, see Col. 9, lines 44-63).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the first valve and first source of pressurized fluid of Coers et al. with the first valve and first and second source of pressurized fluid of Hunt et al. since both are hydraulic systems utilizing a valve and actuator for moving a structure between locked and unlocked configurations; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Coers et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the float arm [114h] is pivotable over an angular range (see Col. 3, lines 50-52) from a first limit position (float arm is lifted farthest from ground, see Col. 6, lines 50-57) to a second limit position (float arm is closest to ground, see Col. 6, lines 48-50) and wherein the first limit position corresponds to the float arm being in the locked configuration (float arm is in locked configuration when farthest from the ground; therefore, first limit position and locked configuration occur at the same float arm position, see Col. 6, lines 44-57).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Coers et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the float arm [114h] is pivotable over an angular range (see Col. 3, lines 50-52) away from the second limit position (float arm is capable of pivoting between the first and second limit positions and therefore away from the second limit position, see Col. 6, lines 48-57), but fails to disclose wherein the second fluid pressure of the second fluid is at a selected level such that, with the first valve in the second position, the float arm occupies a location along the angular range away from the second limit position.
However, Hunt et al. discloses wherein the second fluid pressure of the second fluid ([706], see Col. 9, lines 30-34 and 59-63) is at a selected level such that, with the first valve [660] in the second position [674], the float arm occupies a location along the angular range (second fluid enters/leaves the lift cylinder [510] in communication with the first fluid [652] to maintain the floating, unlocked configuration, see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 44-67).
It can be seen then that when the first valve and first and second source of pressurized fluid of Hunt et al. are provided to the system of Coers et al. that the float arm is pivotable between an angular range away from the second limit position when the second fluid pressure of the second fluid is at a selected level as disclosed by Hunt et al. (see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 44-67).
Regarding claim 4, Hunt et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein, in the first position [672], the first valve [660] is further configured to block passage of the second fluid ([706]; in the first position, an influx of first fluid is inserted to the lift cylinder thereby blocking passage of the second fluid into the lift cylinder, see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 30-34).
Regarding claim 5, Hunt et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein, in the second position [674], the first valve [660] is further configured to block passage of first fluid ([652]; passage of the first fluid is blocked through flow restrictor [694], see Col. 8, lines 24-35).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Coers et al. discloses the system as applied above, but fails to disclose a gauge wheel movable between an extended position and a retracted position.
Hunt et al. discloses a similar system (system of Figs. 3-6) and further comprises a gauge wheel [226] movable between an extended position (see Col. 4, lines 58-64) and a retracted position (see Col. 4, lines 64-66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the gauge wheel of Hunt et al. on the agricultural header of Coers et al. in order to further control the height of the cutter bar assembly with respect to the ground for control on where crops are cut (see Hunt et al. Col. 4, lines 55-61).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Hunt et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein, in response to a first input (input to lower head, see Col. 10, lines 50-61, line 67 and Col. 11, lines 1-5), the gauge wheel [226] is moved to the retracted position (see Col. 4, lines 64-67 and Col. 5, lines 1-6) and the first valve [660] is moved to the second position ([674]; with the gauge wheel retracted, the cutter bar floats in relation to the ground, see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 44-54).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Hunt et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein, in response to a second input (input to raise the header, see Col. 10, lines 58-61), the gauge wheel [226] is moved to the extended position (see Col. 4, lines 58-64) and the first valve [660] is moved to the first position ([672]; with gauge wheel extended, the cutter bar is raised from the ground, see Col. 6, lines 17-28 and Col. 8, lines 24-35).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Hunt et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses wherein the first fluid pressure (pressure of [652]) is greater than (greater to move the lift cylinder, see Col. 5, lines 38-41 and Col. 9, lines 18-35) the second fluid pressure (pressure of [706]).
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Coers et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses an actuator ([116h], see Col. 6, lines 6-7) coupled to the float arm [114h], wherein the actuator moves the float arm into the locked configuration (accumulator [133] is completely filled with fluid, causing an up-force on the arm, raising it to the farthest point from ground and holding it in place, see Col. 6, lines 44-57) and the unlocked configuration (accumulator is emptied, removing the up-force on the arm, see Col. 6, lines 44-57), but fails to explicitly disclose wherein, in the first position, the first valve is configured to transmit the first fluid to the actuator to cause the actuator to move the float arm into the locked configuration, and wherein, in the second position, the first valve is configured to transmit the second fluid to the actuator to cause the actuator to move the float arm into the unlocked configuration.
However, Hunt et al. discloses wherein, in the first position ([672], fluid flow is enabled from the source [562] to the lift cylinder [510], moving the header to the locked configuration, see Col. 6, lines 17-28 and Col. 8, lines 24-35), the first valve [660] is configured to transmit the first fluid to the actuator [510] to cause the actuator to move the float arm into the locked configuration (pressure within [510] is increased, moving the piston [514] and thereby the header to be fully lifted, see Col. 6, lines 25-28 and Fig. 4), and wherein, in the second position ([674], fluid is removed from the lift cylinder but balanced through flow restrictor [694] to maintain the floating, unlocked configuration, see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 44-54), the first valve is configured to transmit the second fluid to the actuator to cause the actuator to move the float arm into the unlocked configuration (the first valve in the second position removes the first fluid allowing for an influx of the second fluid to the actuator, and causing the float arm to move into the unlocked configuration for floating, see Col. 6, lines 25-49, Col. 9, lines 59-63 and Fig. 3).
It can be seen then that when the first valve and first and second source of pressurized fluid of Hunt et al. is provided to the system of Coers et al. that the actuator adjusts the float arm into the locked and unlocked configurations based on which position the valve is in as taught by Hunt et al. (see Col. 6, lines 25-49 and Figs. 3-4).
Regarding claim 12, Coers et al. discloses an agricultural header [100] comprising:
a first section (section of center conveyor [122]);
a wing section (section of side conveyors [118 and 120]) including a first end pivotably connected (through float arms for pivoting with ground contour, see Fig. 1) to the first section, the wing section including a plurality of float arms [114a-j], the plurality of float arms moveable between a locked configuration (accumulator [133] is completely filled with fluid, causing an up-force on the arm, raising it to the farthest point from ground and holding it in place until fluid is emptied, see Col. 6, lines 44-57) and an unlocked configuration (accumulator is emptied, removing the up-force on the arm, see Col. 6, lines 44-57);
a cutter bar ([124]; cutter bar extends the full length of the header) including a first portion (see below) and second portion (see below), the first portion of the cutter bar extending along the first section and the second portion of the cutter bar extending along the wing section (see below), the second portion connected to the plurality of float arms (see Col. 3, lines 44-45); and
a float arm control system ([140], see Col. 6, lines 58-60) including:
a first valve [135] movable between a first position (closed to maintain fluid within accumulator, see Col. 6, lines 44-57 and Col. 7, lines 35-38) configured to cause the float arm to move to the locked configuration and a second position (opened to release fluid within accumulator, see Col. 6, lines 44-57 and Col. 7, lines 35-38) configured to cause the float arm to move to the unlocked configuration;
a first source of pressurized fluid [137] in communication with the first valve, the first source of pressurized fluid including a first fluid at a first fluid pressure (hydraulic fluid provided with a fluid pressure, see Col. 6, lines 42-48).
PNG
media_image1.png
792
401
media_image1.png
Greyscale
But Coers et al. fails to disclose a second pressurized fluid in communication with the first valve, the second pressurized fluid having a second fluid pressure, the first valve, in the first position, being configured to transmit the first pressurized fluid and, in response, to cause the plurality of float arms to move to the locked configuration and, in the second position, configured to transmit the second pressurized fluid and, in response, cause the float arm to move to the unlocked configuration.
Hunt et al. discloses a similar agricultural header [100] comprising:
a first valve [660] movable between a first position ([672], fluid flow is enabled from the source [562] to the lift cylinder, moving the header to the locked configuration, see Col. 6, lines 17-28 and Col. 8, lines 24-35) configured to cause the header to move to the locked configuration and a second position ([674], fluid is removed from the lift cylinder but balanced through flow restrictor [694] to maintain the floating, unlocked configuration, see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 44-54) enables fluid to flow from configured to cause the header to move to the unlocked configuration;
a first pressurized fluid [652] in communication with the first valve (fluid moves through the first valve to reach the lift cylinder, see Col. 9, lines 18-23), the first pressurized fluid having a first fluid pressure (hydraulic fluid provided with a fluid pressure, see Col. 7, lines 21-28); and
a second pressurized fluid [706] in communication with the first valve (communicates with first valve through how much second fluid is allowed to enter/leave the lift cylinder based on the amount of first fluid entering/leaving through the first valve, see Col. 9, lines 30-35 and 59-63), the second pressurized fluid having a second fluid pressure (hydraulic fluid provided with a fluid pressure, see Col. 9, lines 30-35 and 59-63),
the first valve, in the first position, being configured to transmit the first pressurized fluid and, in response, to cause the header to move to the locked configuration (fluid is allowed through the first valve, raising the header to the locked configuration, see Col. 6, lines 17-28 and Col. 8, lines 24-35), in the second position, configured to transmit the second pressurized fluid and, in response, cause the header to move to the unlocked configuration (fluid is enable to flow from the lift cylinder back through the valve and flow restrictor [694], allowing for more fluid from the second source to enter for floating of the header, see Col. 9, lines 44-63).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the first valve and first source of pressurized fluid of Coers et al. with the first valve and first and second source of pressurized fluid of Hunt et al. since both are hydraulic systems utilizing a valve and actuator for moving a structure between locked and unlocked configurations; therefore, yielding the same predictable result.
Claim(s) 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coers et al. (US 7520115 B2) and Hunt et al. (US 12376522 B2) as applied to claims 1-10 and 12-19 above, and further in view of Trowbridge (US 12616094 B2).
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Hunt et al., of the above resultant combination, further discloses the first valve [660] moving from the first position ([672], fluid flow is enabled from the source [562] to the lift cylinder, moving the header to the locked configuration, see Col. 6, lines 17-28 and Col. 8, lines 24-35) to the second position ([674], fluid is removed from the lift cylinder but balanced through flow restrictor [694] to maintain the floating, unlocked configuration, see Col. 8, lines 24-35 and Col. 9, lines 44-54), but fails to disclose a pressure relief valve configured to reduce a pressure transmitted by the first valve in response to the first valve being moved from the first position to the second position.
Trowbridge discloses a similar system [250] for controlling operation of an agricultural header [150] and comprising a pressure relief valve [228] configured to reduce a pressure transmitted by the first valve ([274], see Col. 9, lines 32-45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the pressure relief valve of Trowbridge in the system of operating the float arms of Coers et al. and Hunt et al. in order to direct fluid flow back to the source of the fluid for reducing pressure within the system (see Trowbridge Col. 9, lines 32-45).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892 for the full list of references.
Reference US 11109529 B2 discloses a similar system for controlling operation (see Figs. 4a-4b) of one or more float arms [12] of an agricultural header [1].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNNY WEBB whose telephone number is (571)272-3830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 to 5:30 E.T..
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Rocca can be reached 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.
/SUNNY D WEBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights