DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
STATUS OF CLAIMS
This Non-Final action is in reply to the application 18/938,238 filed on 11/05/2024.
Claims 1 – 15 are rejected
Claims 16 – 17 are objected
Claims 1 – 17 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/05/2024. was fully considered by the examiner. The submission is 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1)(a2) as being unpatentable by EP2460398 – Noel et al. hereinafter as NOEL
Regarding Claim 1
NOEL discloses:
A powered conveying surface bucket assembly for attachment to a vehicle, comprising:
a bucket assembly; ( Fig. 1 – bucket - 10)
a conveyor system that extends at least a portion of a width of a bucket bottom wall of the bucket assembly; and ( Fig. 1 – conveyor - 22)
a power system connected to the conveyor system to rotate the conveyor system with respect to the bucket bottom wall. ( para. 0040 – Motors(not shown in figure) to drive the belt 48 and 50),
Regarding Claim 2
NOEL discloses claim 1:
The assembly as recited in claim 1, further comprising a drive system located between a first lateral conveyor section and a second lateral conveyor section of the conveyor system. ( wherein fig. 3a and 3b there is a drive system between wherein the pully 52 and 54 are part of the drive mechanism )
Regarding Claim 3
NOEL discloses claim 2:
The assembly as recited in claim 2, wherein the drive system is centrally located laterally on the bucket bottom wall. ( wherein fig. 3a and 3b there is a drive system between wherein the pully 52 and 54 are part of the drive mechanism )
Regarding Claim 4
NOEL discloses claim 3:
The assembly as recited in claim 3, wherein the power system is operable to power the drive system. ( para. 0040 – power and motors)
Regarding Claim 5
NOEL discloses claim 4:
The assembly as recited in claim 4, wherein the power system comprises a hydraulic motor. ((para. 0040 - Where in the lines for hydraulic are there for motor to drive the belt)
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.
Claim(s) 6 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by EP2460398 – Noel et al. hereinafter as NOEL in view of US PG Pub 20200100430 – Bertino et al. hereinafter as BERTINO
Regarding Claim 6
NOEL discloses claim 5
NOEL discloses the housing arrangement for a harvester implement however fails to expressly disclose the housing arrangement is centrally located laterally on a bucket bottom wall between the first lateral conveyor section and the second lateral conveyor section. (para. 0040 - fig. 3a – housing for motor(not shown in figure)) NOEL discloses a location of the motor and housing at a location on the bucket, BERTINO also discloses a harvester implement that utilizes a conveyor belt and discloses a housing centrally located laterally on a bucket bottom wall between the first lateral conveyor section and the second lateral conveyor section.( Fig. 8 - motor - and drive train – 6 location of the conveyor belts) This would allow NOEL to utilize a compact transmission and hydraulic motor because of its size benefits (para. (0055] According to this text, FIG. 8 shows an individual conveyor belt (1), whereby there is a compact transmission array for each belt that includes a hydraulic motor (7) for driving it.)
Regarding Claim 7
NOEL / BERTINO discloses claim 6:
NOEL discloses a motor, BERTINO discloses wherein the motor is a hydraulic motor mounted within the housing, BERTINO further discloses :
The assembly as recited in claim 6, wherein the hydraulic motor is mounted within the housing. (fig. 10 wherein the hydraulic motor – 7 motor is mounted within the housing )
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicants invention for the Bucket conveyor system of NOEL to utilize a hydraulic motor as taught in the BERTINO. This would allow for NOEL to have all of the motors to be driven off the same system such as a hydraulic system( para. 0020)
Regarding Claim 8
NOEL / BERTINO discloses claim 7:
BERTINO discloses the combination in claim 7
The assembly as recited in claim 7, further comprising a drive system within the housing to selectively drive the first lateral conveyor section and the second lateral conveyor section. ( based on broadest reasonable interpretation the drive system is located within boundary of the first lateral conveyor and second lateral conveyor)
PNG
media_image1.png
484
674
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9
NOEL / BERTINO discloses claim 8:
BERTINO discloses the combination of conveyor in claim 8
The assembly as recited in claim 8, wherein the drive system comprises a transmission system. ( Fig. 8 - transmission – 6))
PNG
media_image2.png
680
796
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 10 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by EP2460398 – Noel et al. hereinafter as NOEL in view of US PG Pub 20200100430 – Bertino – Grain harvesting implement in further view of RU2085067 – BELOBOKOV et al. hereinafter as BELOBOKOV
Regarding Claim 10
NOEL / BERTINO discloses claim 8:
NOEL / BERTINO discloses of a harvester with a drive system that includes the motors, gearing and chain, BELOBOKOV discloses where the drive system includes gearing and chain and wherein it utilizes a brake clutch to control the engage and disengagement in order to prevent damage to the drive system, BELOBOKOV further discloses:
The assembly as recited in claim 8, wherein the drive system comprises a brake clutch. (page 8 - Brake clutch utilized in order to prevent damage to the drive system)
IT would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicants invention for NOEL / BERTINO harvester with conveyor and drive system that includes a motor, gearing and chain to include a system that has a conveyor with a drive system that includes a brake clutch to control the engage and disengagement in order to prevent damage to the drive system as taught by BELOBOKOV. Doing so merely constitutes the substitution of one known drive system attachment mechanism for another to produce the predictable result of effective drive system for effectively driving the conveyor belts (MPEP 2143, subsection I, B). Additionally This would allow NOEL to improve the reliability of the conveyor through with a conveyor equipped with this drive train and brake clutch (BELOBOKOV – page 8 – paragraph 3 and 4 in order to provide longevity and prevent damage to the drive system)
Regarding Claim 11
NOEL / BERTINO / BELOBOKOV discloses claim 8:
NOEL discloses
The assembly as recited in claim 8, further comprises a running gear system to support each of the first lateral conveyor section and the second lateral conveyor section. ( para. 0039 – chain bar and sprocket.)
Regarding Claim 12
NOEL / BERTINO / BELOBOKOV discloses claim 11:
NOEL discloses
The assembly as recited in claim 11, wherein the running gear system comprises a sprocket assembly along a sprocket axis, a roller assembly along a respective roller axis, and an idler assembly along an idler axis. ( Fig. 3b - where in the pulley 52 is driven through chain 42, 54 is the idler roller))
Regarding Claim 13
NOEL / BERTINO / BELOBOKOV discloses claim 12:
NOEL discloses:
13. The assembly as recited in claim 12, wherein the drive sprocket axis is located adjacent to a leading edge of the bucket bottom wall. ( fig. 2 – wherein the drive sprocket axis is located to leading edge of bucket bottom wall)
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Idler axis)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Leading edge of bucket)]
PNG
media_image3.png
730
672
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14
NOEL / BERTINO / BELOBOKOV discloses claim 13:
NOEL discloses:
14. The assembly as recited in claim 13, wherein the idler axis is located adjacent to a rear edge of the bucket bottom wall.( Fig. 2 wherein the rear edge of bucket bottom is where the idler axis in fig. above.)
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by EP2460398 – Noel et al. hereinafter as NOEL in view of US PG Pub 20200100430 – Bertino – Grain harvesting implement in further view of RU2085067 – BELOBOKOV et al. hereinafter as BELOBOKOV in further view of JP 2020003522 - Koichi Seki et al. hereinafter as KOICHI SEKI
Regarding Claim 15
NOEL / BERTINO / BELOBOKOV disclose claim 14
NOEL discloses of a blade on the bucket KOICHI SEKI disclose wherein the bucket blade is a replaceable bucket leading edge.
15. The assembly as recited in claim 14, further comprising a replaceable bucket leading edge along the leading edge of the bucket bottom wall, the replaceable bucket leading edge angled with respect to the bucket bottom wall. (fig.5 –blade 10)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicants invention for NOEL’s bucket leading edge to have a replaceable bucket leading edge as taught by KOICHI SEKI. This would allow NOEL to have a blade replacement to reduce time while a blade is significantly worn. ( KOICHI SEKI – abstract page 1)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 – 17 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.
While a powered conveyor belt is known in the art , NOEL / BERTINO / BELOBOKOV / KOICHI SEKI don’t explicitly disclose wherein the rear gate rotatable between an open position and a closed position, the rear gate located adjacent a bucket back wall and the bucket bottom wall. a front gate movable between a front gate open position and a front gate closed position, the front gate located adjacent a bucket cutting edge and the bucket bottom wall, it doesn’t disclose the claim elements in a way that would not rely on an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFRED H TSUI whose telephone number is (571)272-9511. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Chris Sebesta can be reached on 5712720547. 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.
/A.H.T/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights