Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 06, 2026
Application No. 18/992,528

DRAPER TRACK

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 08, 2025
Priority
Aug 08, 2022 — nonprovisional of PCTCA2022051203
Examiner
HUTCHINS, CATHLEEN R
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
MACDON INDUSTRIES LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
953 granted / 1136 resolved
+23.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1165
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
44.3%
+4.3% vs TC avg
§102
32.6%
-7.4% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1136 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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. Claim(s) 1, 7-11, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Talbot, et al. US5459986. Regarding claim 1, Talbot, et al. teaches a draper track assembly 26 for use on a draper header (Figure 1) for harvesting agricultural crops, wherein the draper header includes a header frame 17, the draper track assembly 26 comprising: a draper track 12 having a track portion 13 extending longitudinally from an inboard end (one end of Figure 1) to an outboard end (other end of Figure 1) and a mounting channel 23 extending from a bottom (Figure 2, extending from surface 72, which is considered the bottom since it is under the outer surface of 12) of the track portion 13; a support clamp 10 configured to be fixedly coupled (Column 4: 2-5 “generally C-shaped beam 12 which provides structural support for the cutter bar with the C-shaped beam being welded to the front ends of the forwardly extending beams 10”) to the mounting channel 23 wherein the support clamp 10 is configured to be fixedly coupled (via the welding) to the header frame 17 (via 25a resting on the bottom of 23); and an intermediary support 45 having a bracket 25, wherein the bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 are configured to interlock with each other (shown in Figure 2 wherein 25a sits on the horizontal portion of 23) to prevent lateral movement (from the left to the right in Figure 2, where sides of 25a engaged with either 15 or 23) between the draper track 12 and the intermediary support 45 while allowing longitudinal expansion (Column 4: 30-35 "draper assembly 26 can thus slide longitudinally of the cutter bar as a whole integral unit for adjustment of the header to various modes of operation in which the discharge opening between two such draper assemblies is moved from one end of the header to a center section of the header”) of the draper track 12, wherein the intermediary support 45 is configured to be fixedly coupled (laterally and vertically via engagement of 25a with 23, wherein 25a cannot move further downwards relative to 17) to the header frame 17. Regarding claim 7, Talbot, et al. teaches that the bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 are configured to interlock (wherein 25a interlocks at the bottom of 23, preventing downward vertical movement, and only providing nominal upward vertical movement) with each other to prevent vertical movement between the draper track 12 and the intermediary support 45 while allowing longitudinal expansion (as recited above) of the draper track 12. Regarding claim 8, Talbot, et al. teaches that the bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 include opposing c-shaped configurations (shown in Figure 2, with 23 as generally c-shaped in one direction, and 25a-27 as an oppositely oriented c-shape) to interlock the bracket 25 with the mounting channel 23. Regarding claim 9, Talbot, et al. teaches a second intermediary support 45 (Column 4: 27-29 "The bracket 25 forms one of a plurality of such brackets spaced longitudinally of the draper assembly for hanging the draper assembly on the cutter bar”, wherein the plurality of such brackets can include the claimed second intermediary support to interface with the bracket) having a second bracket 25 (one of the plurality of brackets), wherein the second bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 are configured to interlock with each other (as recited above) to prevent lateral movement between the draper track 12 and the second intermediary support 45 while allowing longitudinal expansion of the draper track 12, wherein the second intermediary support 45 is configured to be coupled to the header frame 17. Regarding claim 10, Talbot, et al. teaches a plurality of intermediary supports 45 (Column 4:27-29), wherein each of the plurality of intermediary support 45s includes a support bracket 25 configured to interlock (as recited above)with the mounting channel 23 to prevent lateral movement between the draper track 12 and the intermediary supports 45 while allowing longitudinal expansion (as recited above) of the draper track 12, wherein each of the plurality of intermediary support 45s is configured to be coupled to the header frame 17 (as recited above). Regarding claim 11, Talbot, et al. teaches a draper header (Figure 1) for harvesting agricultural crops, the draper header (Figure 1) comprising: a header frame 17; a draper belt 32 (Column 4: 48-49 “draper canvas 32 in the form of a continuous loop or band of fabric”) rotatably supported (Column 4: 49-51 “wrapped around the rollers 30 and 31 at respective ends to form an upper run 33 of the draper canvas on top of the rollers and a lower run 34 of the canvas underneath the rollers”) by the header frame 17 for transporting harvested agricultural crops, wherein the draper belt 32 includes a plurality of cleats 39 (wherein slats are the same as the claimed cleats) extending laterally along an outer surface (outside) of the draper belt 32; and a draper track assembly 26 comprising: a draper track 12 having a track portion 13 extending longitudinally from an inboard end (one end of Figure 1) to an outboard end (other end of Figure 1) and a mounting channel 23 extending from a bottom of the track portion 13, wherein a portion 75 of the track portion 13 extends (vertically) between the draper belt 32 and the header frame 17 under the plurality of cleats 39 (wherein 75 extends below 39 as shown in Figure 2) on a return run 34 of the draper belt 32; a support clamp 10 configured to be fixedly coupled (as recited above) to the mounting channel 23 wherein the support clamp 10 is configured to be fixedly coupled (as recited above)to the header frame 17; and an intermediary support 45 having a bracket 25, wherein the bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 are configured to interlock with each other to prevent lateral movement between the draper track 12 and the intermediary support 45 while allowing longitudinal expansion of the draper track 12, wherein the intermediary support 45 is configured to be fixedly coupled to the header frame 17. Regarding claim 17, Talbot, et al. teaches that the bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 are configured to interlock with each other(as recited above) to prevent vertical movement between the draper track 12 and the intermediary support 45 while allowing longitudinal expansion of the draper track 12. Regarding claim 18, Talbot, et al. teaches that the bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 include opposing c-shaped configurations (as shown in Figure 2, where 25a and 27 define one c-shaped configuration and 23 provides an oppositely directed c-shape configuration) to interlock the bracket 25 with the mounting channel 23. Regarding claim 19, Talbot, et al. teaches that the draper track assembly 26 further comprises a second intermediary support 45 (Column 4: 27-29) having a second bracket 25, wherein the second bracket 25 and the mounting channel 23 are configured to interlock with each other to prevent lateral movement between the draper track 12 and the second intermediary support 45 while allowing longitudinal expansion of the draper track 12, wherein the second intermediary support 45 is configured to be coupled to the header frame 17. Regarding claim 20, Talbot, et al. teaches that the draper track assembly 26 further comprises a plurality of intermediary support 45s, wherein each of the plurality of intermediary support 45s includes a support bracket 25 configured to interlock with the mounting channel 23 to prevent lateral movement between the draper track 12 and the intermediary support 45s while allowing longitudinal expansion of the draper track 12, wherein each of the plurality of intermediary support 45s is configured to be coupled to the header frame 17. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-6 and 12-16 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 2 and 12, Talbot, et al. does not teach, in combination, that: the mounting channel 23 includes a plurality of c-shaped mounting arms that extend inwardly toward a center of the mounting channel 23 and a center rib extending between the mounting arms; and the support clamp 10 includes a base and a plurality of bracket 25 sections extending from the base, wherein the bracket 25 sections are configured to extend into the mounting arms along the center rib. In particular, talbot, et al. does not teach that the mounting channel has a plurality of c-shaped mounting arms and a center rib. In contrast, Talbot, et al. only teaches a single c-shaped mounting arm 23. Modification would have required impermissible hindsight reasoning, since Talbot’s c-shaped mounting arm 23 performs its purpose of providing vertical and forward support for the bracket 25 from the track 11. Regarding claims 3 and 13, Talbot, et al. does not teach, in combination, that the bracket 25 sections include teeth configured to engage with the mounting channel 23 to restrict movement in the longitudinal direction between the support clamp 10 and the mounting channel 23. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ciccorilli US6427830 teaches a conveyor section with a rail 10 that has a plurality of inwardly facing c-shapes (bottom of 10), but does not teach the claimed center rib. Abbestam, et al. US2004/0211652 teaches a conveyor with a rail (Figure 4) that has a plurality of inwardly facing c-shapes (16 and 16’), but does not teach the claimed center rib. Coers, et al. US2009/0266044 teaches a typical support for a draper belt (Figure 5) with clips 48 mounted to the top of a rail/draper track 74. Coers, et al. does not teach the draper track has a mounting channel or a support claim, as claimed. Rayfield, et al. US7908836 teaches a draper header (Figure 5) with a rail/draper track 26 and guide 82. Rayfield, et al. does not teach the track has a mounting channel and does not teach a support clamp as claimed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Cathleen Hutchins whose telephone number is (571)270-3651. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11am-9:30PM EST. 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. /CATHLEEN R HUTCHINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672 7/16/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 08, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12690506
BALE PICKUP DEVICE FOR PICKING UP OF ROUND BALES OF A ROUND BALER
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692762
SHIFT SET PACKER
1y 6m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12687106
DOWNHOLE FIBER OPTIC CONNECTOR WITH A SIDE POCKET AND KICK OVER ASSEMBLY IN A WELLBORE
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12667046
Mower and outdoor work tool
2y 11m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12667045
BASECUTTER ASSEMBLY CONTROL FOR A SUGARCANE HARVESTER
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+7.9%)
2y 6m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1136 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month