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 main arm downforce assembly…to provide an adjustable downforce force to maintain the coulter blade engaged with ground” in claim 1, and “providing an adjustable downforce force by a main arm downforce assembly…to maintain the coulter blade engaged with ground” in claim 11.
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. The specification describes the main arm downforce assembly as a spring or a hydraulic unit.
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, 2, 5-9, 11, 12 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bigbee et al. (US 4,760,806).
As concerns claims 1 and 11, Bigbee shows a unit (24) and a method, comprising: a main arm (30) pivotally mounted (via 34 & 114) to a toolbar mount tube (26); a coulter blade (38) operatively connected (via 36) to the main arm (Fig. 2); a closure arm (380, 392) pivotally mounted (via 60 & 376) to the main arm (Fig. 2); a closure blade (72; a flat or concave part of a machine that comes into contact with the material to be moved [merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blade]) mounted (via 394) to the closure arm (Fig. 2); a main arm downforce assembly (64), operatively connected (via 156 & 136/138) between the toolbar mount tube and the main arm, to provide an adjustable downforce force (via compression & extension of spring assembly during operation) to maintain the coulter blade engaged with ground (Fig. 2); and a closure arm torsion spring (382), operatively connected (via 384) to the closure arm, to provide varying downforce forces (via 386 & 374) on the closure blade to maintain the closure blade engaged with the ground during operation (Fig. 2).
As concerns claim 2, Bigbee shows wherein the main arm downforce assembly includes a spring (64) or a hydraulic unit.
As concerns claim 5, Bigbee shows wherein the closure arm torsion spring (382) engages with a spring stop pin (374) mounted on a closure tension adjustment plate (372), the closure tension adjustment plate having multiple positions for the varying downforce on the closure blade (Fig. 2).
As concerns claim 6, Bigbee shows wherein the closure tension adjustment plate (372) comprises four positions (four of pins 374) that engage the closure arm torsion spring (382) at different angles of the closure arm to provide different levels of down-pressure on the closure blade (Fig. 2).
As concerns claim 7, Bigbee shows wherein the main arm (30) comprises a modular design having separately attachable components including: a closure pin mount plate (370); a downforce assembly mount plate (60); and a main blade angle mount (188).
As concerns claim 8, Bigbee shows wherein the downforce assembly mount plate (60) is configured to accommodate interchangeable down-pressure mechanisms including a spring assembly (64), a hydraulic cylinder, or an airbag.
As concerns claim 9, Bigbee shows wherein the closure arm torsion spring (382) is configured to act as a catch to stop the closure arm (380, 392) from pivoting beyond a predetermined height when encountering obstacles during operation (Fig. 2).
As concerns claim 12, Bigbee shows wherein the main arm downforce assembly includes a spring (64) or a hydraulic unit.
As concerns claim 15, Bigbee shows wherein the closure arm torsion spring (382) engages with a spring stop pin (374) mounted on a closure tension adjustment plate (372), the closure tension adjustment plate having multiple positions for the varying downforce on the closure blade (Fig. 2).
As concerns claim 16, Bigbee shows wherein the closure tension adjustment plate (372) comprises four positions (four of pins 374) that engage the closure arm torsion spring (382) at different angles of the closure arm to provide different levels of down-pressure on the closure blade (Fig. 2).
As concerns claim 17, Bigbee shows wherein the main arm (30) comprises a modular design having separately attachable components including: a closure pin mount plate (370); a downforce assembly mount plate (60); and a main blade angle mount (188).
As concerns claim 18, Bigbee shows wherein the downforce assembly mount plate (60) is configured to accommodate interchangeable down-pressure mechanisms including a spring assembly (64), a hydraulic cylinder, or an airbag.
As concerns claim 19, Bigbee shows wherein the closure arm torsion spring (382) is configured to act as a catch to stop the closure arm (380, 392) from pivoting beyond a predetermined height when encountering obstacles during operation (Fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 10, 13, 14 and 20 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) a manure application unit, comprising: a main arm pivotally mounted to a toolbar mount tube; a coulter blade operatively connected to the main arm; a closure arm pivotally mounted to the main arm; a closure blade mounted to the closure arm; a main arm downforce assembly, operatively connected between the toolbar mount tube and the main arm, to provide an adjustable downforce force to maintain the coulter blade engaged with ground; and a closure arm torsion spring, operatively connected to the closure arm, to provide varying downforce forces on the closure blade to maintain the closure blade engaged with the ground during operation, wherein the main arm downforce assembly includes a spring or a hydraulic unit, and wherein the main arm downforce assembly comprises a nested coil spring system having an inner spring positioned within an outer spring to maximize spring loads.
Bigbee et al. (US 4,760,806) shows a unit, comprising: a main arm pivotally mounted to a toolbar mount tube; a coulter blade operatively connected to the main arm; a closure arm pivotally mounted to the main arm; a closure blade mounted to the closure arm; a main arm downforce assembly, operatively connected between the toolbar mount tube and the main arm, to provide an adjustable downforce force to maintain the coulter blade engaged with ground; and a closure arm torsion spring, operatively connected to the closure arm, to provide varying downforce forces on the closure blade to maintain the closure blade engaged with the ground during operation, wherein the main arm downforce assembly includes a spring or a hydraulic unit. However, Bigbee does not show wherein the main arm downforce assembly comprises a nested coil spring system having an inner spring positioned within an outer spring to maximize spring loads. Furthermore, it does not appear obvious in the art to substitute the spring assembly of Bigbee with a nested coil spring system having an inner spring positioned within an outer spring to maximize spring loads.
b) a manure application unit, comprising: a main arm pivotally mounted to a toolbar mount tube; a coulter blade operatively connected to the main arm; a closure arm pivotally mounted to the main arm; a closure blade mounted to the closure arm; a main arm downforce assembly, operatively connected between the toolbar mount tube and the main arm, to provide an adjustable downforce force to maintain the coulter blade engaged with ground; a closure arm torsion spring, operatively connected to the closure arm, to provide varying downforce forces on the closure blade to maintain the closure blade engaged with the ground during operation, and a closure arm pivot pin is insertable into a main arm tube and defines a blind hole, wherein the main arm tube includes a threaded hole aligned with the blind hole of the closure arm pivot pin, and wherein at least one set screw is threaded into the threaded hole to engage the blind hole and lock the closure arm pivot pin against rotation and axial movement.
Bigbee et al. (US 4,760,806) shows a unit, comprising: a main arm pivotally mounted to a toolbar mount tube; a coulter blade operatively connected to the main arm; a closure arm pivotally mounted to the main arm; a closure blade mounted to the closure arm; a main arm downforce assembly, operatively connected between the toolbar mount tube and the main arm, to provide an adjustable downforce force to maintain the coulter blade engaged with ground; and a closure arm torsion spring, operatively connected to the closure arm, to provide varying downforce forces on the closure blade to maintain the closure blade engaged with the ground during operation. However, Bigbee does not show a closure arm pivot pin is insertable into a main arm tube and defines a blind hole, wherein the main arm tube includes a threaded hole aligned with the blind hole of the closure arm pivot pin, and wherein at least one set screw is threaded into the threaded hole to engage the blind hole and lock the closure arm pivot pin against rotation and axial movement.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Naylor et al. (US 2013/0032366) and Winding et al. (CN 1308842) each show a closure arm torsion spring, operatively connected to the closure arm, to provide varying downforce forces on the closure blade to maintain the closure blade engaged with the ground during operation.
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