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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 8, 10-12, and 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andreas (EP 4252521 A1), hereinafter Andreas in view of Reinecke et al. (US 2017 /0020074 A1), hereinafter Rein.
Regarding claim 1, Andreas discloses grain cleaning system (4, fig. 1-2, [0030]), comprising:
a support mechanism for supporting the sieve assembly ([0004], wherein the sieve assembly must be supported to be placed in the sieve chamber of the combine harvester),
a sieve assembly (27, fig. 1, [0030]), the sieve assembly comprising a plurality of components including one or more sieves (upper and lower sieve, fig. 1, [0030]), said sieve assembly being configured to undergo fore-aft shaking movements in a direction substantially parallel to the sidewalls ([0030-0031]),
a first actuating mechanism (coupling arm [0015 and 0031]) configured to drive said fore-aft shaking movements ([0015 and 0031]), said first actuating mechanism comprising one or more drive arms coupled to one or more of the components of the sieve assembly (coupling arm [0015 and 0031]),
a plurality of rocking arms (pivot pin 9, [0003, 0015, and 0030]), each rocking arm having two ends ([0015]) and being coupled at one end of the two ends to the to one of the components of the sieve assembly for supporting said one of the components while enabling said one of the components to perform a fore-aft shaking movement ([0015 and 0030-0033]),
wherein the rocking arms and the one or more drive arms are coupled to the
respective components of the sieve assembly by shafts (shaft of the pivot pin/ coupling arm) which are thereby configured to undergo the same fore-aft shaking movements as said respective components ([0015 and 0030-0033]), wherein at least one of said shafts passes through an opening in one of the sidewalls of the support frame, the opening being dimensioned to allow the fore-aft shaking movement of the shaft (fig. 2-3, [0015 and 0030-0033]),
(v) at least one sealing assembly (fig. 2-4) including:
a sealing plate (1, fig. 2-4, [0033]) connected to the shaft that passes through said opening, so that the sealing plate performs the same fore-aft movement as the shaft relative to the support frame while being axially movable relative to the shaft, the sealing plate having a front side facing towards the sieve assembly and a back side facing away from the sieve assembly (fig. 1-4, [0030-0033]), and
a biasing mechanism configured to bias the sealing plate against the inner or outer surface of said one of the sidewalls, wherein the biasing mechanism and the dimensions of the sealing plate are configured so that the sealing plate is in physical contact with said inner or outer surface, thereby closing said opening in said one of the sidewalls during said fore-aft movement of the shaft (6, fig. 1-4,[0030-0033], wherein since 6 is force transmitting while also remaining for a sill and allowing the back and forth movement it acts as a bias mechanism).
Andreas discloses the above but fails to explicitly disclose a support frame comprising two opposing sidewalls, each sidewall of the two opposing sidewalls having an inner surface and an outer surface.
Rein teaches a similar device in the same field of agricultural harvesters wherein a support frame (70+72+74+76, fig. 2, [0033]) comprising two opposing sidewalls (70+72, fig. 2, [0033]), each sidewall of the two opposing sidewalls having an inner surface and an outer surface (fig. 2); a sieve assembly (48+50, fig. 2, [0033]) mounted at least partly between the inner surfaces of said opposing sidewalls (fig. 2, [0033]); and a plurality of rocking arms (84, fig. 2, [0033]) and being coupled at one end of the two ends to the support frame (fig. 2, [0033]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substituted the generic support mechanism of Andreas with the frame of Rein to yield the predictable result of connecting and supporting the sieve assembly ([0004] of Andreas).
Regarding claim 3, Andreas in view of Rein teaches wherein the biasing mechanism comprises one or more springs coupled between the shaft and the back side of the sealing plate (6, fig. 1-4, [0030-0033], wherein since 6 is force transmitting while also remaining for a sill and allowing the back and forth movement it acts as a bias mechanism).
Regarding claim 8, Andreas in view of Rein teaches further comprising a blocking mechanism configured to fix an orientation of the sealing plate relative to the shaft during said fore-aft shaking movement (7, fig. 2-4, [0032] of Andreas).
Regarding claim 10, Andreas in view of Rein teaches wherein the sealing plate comprises a central opening and wherein the shaft closely fits in said central opening ([0030-0033], fig. 2-4 of Andreas).
Regarding claim 11, Andreas in view of Rein teaches claim 10, but the first embodiment of Andreas does not explicitly disclose two parts each part comprising one half of an opening, each half fitting around one half of the shaft. However, the second embodiment (fig. 5-7, [0036] of Andreas). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have simply substituted the first embodiment for the second embodiment to yeield the predictable result of providing a seal ([0032]).
Regarding claim 12, Andreas in view of Rein teaches wherein the sealing plate is at least partially formed of a synthetic material (plastic, [0025] of Andreas).
Regarding claim 14, Andreas in view of Rein teaches a combine harvester (5, fig. 1, [0030] of Andreaus) comprising the grain cleaning system according to claim 1 (see claim 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-7, 9, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 4 and 6, given the combination Andreas and Rien and the other limitations of the claims of it is unclear how to it would be possible for a front side or a back side of the spring/ sealing plate to the inner surface or outer surface of the sidewalls since the front and back of the sealing plate, which has a section that acts as the spring, is perpendicular to the front/ back off the sidewalls.
Regarding claim 9, no prior art was found that teaches using a magnetic connection between a frame and a sealing plate.
Regarding claim 13, no prior art was found that teaches using a reinforcing rib in conjunction with a seal and frame. To do the modification would require undo hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Murray et al. (US 2013/0158816 A1) – a side-shaking mechanism.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer A Railey whose telephone number is (571)270-7353. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-4).
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/JENNIFER A RAILEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights