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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a seeding and fertilizing mechanism” in claim 1, “a pre-sowing pressing mechanism” in claim 1, “a furrowing mechanism” in claim 1, “a vertical rotary tillage mechanism” in claim 1, and “a seeding profiling mechanism” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He et al. (CN 114731788).
As concerns claim 1, He shows a combined seeder for a full straw mulching condition operation, comprising a frame (1), wherein a seeding and fertilizing mechanism (24, 2, 3, 4) is arranged above the frame (Fig. 1 & 2), a pre-sowing pressing mechanism (16) is arranged below the frame (Fig. 1 & 2), and a mechanical transmission mechanism (20, 37) is arranged at a middle position of the frame (Fig. 1 & 4); two ends of the mechanical transmission mechanism are respectively connected to a furrowing mechanism (26) and a vertical rotary tillage mechanism (19), the vertical rotary tillage mechanism (19) is arranged in front of the frame (Fig. 1), and the furrowing mechanism (26) and a seeding profiling mechanism (7, 14, 25, 13) are arranged behind the frame (Fig. 2).
As concerns claim 2, He shows wherein the seeding and fertilizing mechanism comprises a seed box (24) and a fertilizer box (2, 3, 4), wherein the seed box and the fertilizer box are set above the frame (Fig. 1 & 2), a plurality of fertilizer apparatuses (55) are arranged below the fertilizer box (Fig. 7), and a plurality of seeding apparatuses (7) are arranged below the seed box (Fig. 1); and the plurality of fertilizer apparatuses are driven by a fertilizer discharging motor (50), the plurality of seeding apparatuses are driven by a seed discharging motor (50), a rotating speed of the fertilizer discharging motor and a rotating speed of the seed discharging motor are adjusted by an intelligent control system (intelligent module) according to a requirement of a seed fertilizer amount, the seed discharging motor and the fertilizer discharging motor are fixed on the frame (Fig. 6), the fertilizer discharging motor and the seed discharging motor are connected to a reducer (51, 531, 532), and the reducer is fixed on the frame (Fig. 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 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: the prior art of record does not appear to anticipate and/or render obvious a combined seeder for a full straw mulching condition operation, comprising a frame, wherein a seeding and fertilizing mechanism is arranged above the frame, a pre-sowing pressing mechanism is arranged below the frame, and a mechanical transmission mechanism is arranged at a middle position of the frame; two ends of the mechanical transmission mechanism are respectively connected to a furrowing mechanism and a vertical rotary tillage mechanism, the vertical rotary tillage mechanism is arranged in front of the frame, and the furrowing mechanism and a seeding profiling mechanism are arranged behind the frame, wherein the seeding and fertilizing mechanism comprises a seed box and a fertilizer box, wherein the seed box and the fertilizer box are set above the frame, a plurality of fertilizer apparatuses are arranged below the fertilizer box, and a plurality of seeding apparatuses are arranged below the seed box; and the plurality of fertilizer apparatuses are driven by a fertilizer discharging motor, the plurality of seeding apparatuses are driven by a seed discharging motor, a rotating speed of the fertilizer discharging motor and a rotating speed of the seed discharging motor are adjusted by an intelligent control system according to a requirement of a seed fertilizer amount, the seed discharging motor and the fertilizer discharging motor are fixed on the frame, the fertilizer discharging motor and the seed discharging motor are connected to a reducer, and the reducer is fixed on the frame, and wherein the pre-sowing pressing mechanism comprises a pressing roller set under the frame, two ends of the pressing roller are respectively connected to two rotating arms, a first end of each of the two rotating arms on both sides is hinged to the frame, a second end of each of the two rotating arms is hinged to a lower end of a hydraulic cylinder, and an upper end of the hydraulic cylinder is connected to the frame; and a plurality of side deep fertilization furrow openers are arranged in front of the pressing roller and fixedly connected to the frame.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mei et al. (CN 115399095) and Liu et al. (CN 111418293) each show a combined seeder.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R BUCK whose telephone number is (571)270-3653. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-5.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571)272-5405. 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.
/MATTHEW R BUCK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights