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 § 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 11 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hansen (DE 4417964).
As concerns claim 11, Hansen shows a sowing unit (Fig. 1) for distributing granular products onto or into the soil, the sowing unit comprising: a chassis (1); a first assembly (Fig. 1) for distributing a first granular product, the first assembly comprising: a main hopper (11) fixed to a frame (frame structure of storage container 11), wherein the main hopper is configured to move in relation to the chassis between at least a lowered position (position shown in broken lines) and a raised position (position shown in solid lines), wherein when in the lowered position the sowing unit is in a working position and when in the raised position the sowing unit is in a maintenance position (it has been held that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim); and a mechanism (12, 13, 16, 17, 19) for tilting said frame comprising a collapsible quadrangle or double quadrangle connecting the frame to the chassis, wherein the tilting mechanism is arranged substantially perpendicular (along vertical plane aligned with the surface of the page) to a plane formed by the chassis (along horizontal plane in and out of the page) and maintained substantially perpendicular to the plane in: the lowered position; the raised position; and when moving from between the lowered position and the raised position (Fig. 1).
As concerns claim 18, Hansen shows a hitching mechanism (2, 3) incorporating a tool bar to which the chassis is connected, as well as a mechanism (three-point hitch of a tractor [not shown in Fig. 1]) for adjusting the vertical position of the sowing unit featuring an adjustable parallelogram or adjustable parallelepiped positioned substantially horizontally and configured to be articulated relative to the chassis by at least one pivot point, wherein the at least one pivot point comprises at least one pivot point of the mechanism for tilting the frame (Fig. 1).
As concerns claims 19 and 20, Hansen shows wherein the first distribution assembly for the first granular product comprises a first mechanism configured to distribute the first granular product integral with the frame and configured to be moved with the frame, wherein the sowing unit further comprises a first mechanism for conveying the first granular product to the soil integral with the chassis and fixed in relation to the chassis, wherein the first mechanism for distributing the first granular product is fitted to an arm attached to the frame, wherein the arm extends from the frame to the chassis, and wherein the arm is configured to move relative to the chassis and to engage and disengage from an attachment means provided on the chassis and configured to support the arm (description of the specification).
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 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansen alone.
As concerns claims 21-24, Hansen discloses the claimed invention except for a second distribution assembly for distributing a second granular product to the soil, the second distribution assembly comprising a first additional hopper configured to move relative to the frame, wherein the second distribution assembly for the second granular product comprises a second unitary distribution mechanism configured to move relative to the chassis, and a third distribution assembly for distributing a third granular product to the soil, the third distribution assembly comprising a second additional hopper configured to move relative to the chassis, wherein the third distribution assembly for distributing the third granular product to the soil further comprises a third unitary distribution mechanism configured to move relative to the chassis, the sowing unit further comprising a third mechanism configured to convey the third granular product to the soil. It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized a second distribution assembly and a third distribution assembly for the expected benefit of providing additional row units for distributing additional granular product to the soil. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that using a second distribution assembly and a third distribution assembly in addition to the first distribution assembly would have provided predictable results and a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Hansen to obtain the invention specified in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-17 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.
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 sowing unit for distributing granular products onto or into the soil, the sowing unit comprising: a chassis; a first assembly for distributing a first granular product, the first assembly comprising: a main hopper fixed to a frame, wherein the main hopper is configured to move in relation to the chassis between at least a lowered position and a raised position, wherein when in the lowered position the sowing unit is in a working position and when in the raised position the sowing unit is in a maintenance position; and a mechanism for tilting said frame comprising a collapsible quadrangle or double quadrangle connecting the frame to the chassis, wherein the tilting mechanism is arranged substantially perpendicular to a plane formed by the chassis and maintained substantially perpendicular to the plane in: the lowered position; the raised position; and when moving from between the lowered position and the raised position, wherein the mechanism for tilting the frame comprises a lower arm fixed and integral with the chassis, the lower arm comprising two fixed lower pivot points about which a main connecting rod and a secondary connecting rod are configured to be articulated, wherein the frame is configured to be articulated relative to the main connecting rod at a first upper pivot point and the secondary connecting rod is configured to be articulated relative to an upper linkage arm at a second upper pivot point, wherein the upper linkage arm is configured to be connected to at least one of the frame and the main connecting rod, wherein each of the first upper pivot point and the second upper pivot point is configured to be able to move in relation to the chassis.
Hansen shows in Fig. 1 a sowing unit for distributing granular products onto or into the soil, the sowing unit comprising: a chassis; a first assembly for distributing a first granular product, the first assembly comprising: a main hopper fixed to a frame, wherein the main hopper is configured to move in relation to the chassis between at least a lowered position and a raised position; and a mechanism for tilting said frame comprising a collapsible quadrangle or double quadrangle connecting the frame to the chassis, wherein the tilting mechanism is arranged substantially perpendicular to a plane formed by the chassis and maintained substantially perpendicular to the plane in: the lowered position; the raised position; and when moving from between the lowered position and the raised position. However, Hansen does not show wherein the mechanism for tilting the frame comprises a lower arm fixed and integral with the chassis, the lower arm comprising two fixed lower pivot points about which a main connecting rod and a secondary connecting rod are configured to be articulated, wherein the frame is configured to be articulated relative to the main connecting rod at a first upper pivot point and the secondary connecting rod is configured to be articulated relative to an upper linkage arm at a second upper pivot point, wherein the upper linkage arm is configured to be connected to at least one of the frame and the main connecting rod, wherein each of the first upper pivot point and the second upper pivot point is configured to be able to move in relation to the chassis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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