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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it includes the legal phraseology “said”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention:
Regarding claims 1-2, 9, the use of the term "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention (i.e. whether the limitations are or are not positively recited).
Claims 4 and 5 include the phrase “what is known as”. However, this language is generally narrative and indefinite and fails to conform with current U.S. practice.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1, 3-5, 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su CN 119302085 A in view of Ringwood 837,124.
Independent Claims 1, 12: Su discloses a metering unit (Figs. 6-7) for a seed drill used by the drain method of claim 12, the metering unit comprising at least:
-an airtight casing (309, 320) comprising at least a fixed part (309) and a door (320) that can be moved between an open position and a closed position,
-a metering element (318) for a plurality of granular elements, arranged for discrete and singular distribution (via 319) of a plurality of granular elements, the metering element being placed inside the casing to separate the interior of the casing into a first chamber (the chamber of 309) and a second chamber (the chamber of 320), which are different, the first chamber being configured to receive all or part of the plurality of granular elements at least in a reserve zone (at 310), and the second chamber being closed with the door in its closed position (Figs. 4-5) and being open with the door in its open position (Figs. 6-7),
-a drain chute (315) mounted on the outside of the fixed part of the casing, preferably on the side of the second chamber, by at least one assembly element (attachment means or fasteners connecting the chute to the casing), the buffer zone (the downstream zone of 315) having a buffer height less than the reserve height (at the inner or attachment end of 315, as seen in Figs. 7-8), as per claim 1.
However, Su fails to disclose wherein the metering unit is characterized in that the drain chute is configured so that it can be positioned in an intermediate drain position, in which the drain chute is configured to allow the flow of all or part of the plurality of granular elements initially present in the reserve zone towards a buffer zone of the drain chute and to allow the storage of said granular elements in the buffer zone without them flowing directly out of the drain chute, as per claim 1.
Ringwood discloses a similar drain chute (4, 5, Fig. 2) configured so that it can be positioned in an intermediate drain position (page 2, lines 80-88), in which the drain chute is configured to allow the flow of all or part of the plurality of granular elements initially present in the reserve zone (at the bottom of the box) towards a buffer zone (midway of the chute 4, 5) of the drain chute and to allow the storage of said granular elements in the buffer zone without them flowing directly out of the drain chute (as positioned intermediately by the operator), as per claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the intermediate positions taught by Ringwood for the chute of Su in order to distribute material gradually and at varying rates.
Dependent Claims 3-5, 9: Ringwood, of the resultant combination above, further discloses wherein the drain chute (4, 5) can be positioned in an outflow position (its lowermost position), configured to allow the flow, towards a discharge zone (the ground or field) of a lower discharge height relative to the buffer height (the height midway of the chute 4, 5), of all or part of the plurality of granular elements initially present in the reserve zone (at the bottom of the box) or the buffer zone (midway down the chute 4, 5), the discharge zone being located outside of the drain chute, as per claim 3;
wherein in the intermediate drain position (described in page 2, lines 80-88), the drain chute (4, 5) is horizontal or tilted by what is known as an intermediate angle of inclination (when combined with Su, any intermediate angles that are not low enough to distribute granular elements), preventing the flow of granular element(s) out of the drain chute, as per claim 4;
wherein in the outflow position (the lowermost position of chute 4, 5), the drain chute (4, 5) is tilted by what is known as a flow angle of inclination, allowing the flow of granular element(s), which is greater than the angle of inclination known as intermediate angle of inclination (as described in page 2, lines 80-88), as per claim 5;
wherein the drain chute (4, 5) is mounted so as to be mobile, preferably in rotation by the at least one assembly element (4’), which can preferably be maneuvered with just one hand (via lever 8), to be positioned in the intermediate drain position (as described in page 2, lines 80-88), in the outflow position (the chutes lowermost position), and between said positions (page 2, lines 80-88), without requiring the drain chute to be detached from the box, as per claim 9.
Dependent Claims 10-11: Su discloses a seeder element (any of the row units seen in Fig. 1) comprising at least one hopper (311, 312) arranged to contain a plurality of granular elements and being connected by conveying means (310) to said metering unit (shown in Figs. 6-7), wherein the metering unit is in accordance with claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above under Su in view of Ringwood), as per claim 10;
A seed drill (3) comprising at least one chassis (1) on which at least one seeder element (the row units seen in Fig. 1) is mounted, wherein the at least one seeder element is in accordance with claim 10 (see the rejection of claim 10 immediately above), as per claim 11.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bulmahn EP 3610714 A1 in view of Ringwood 837,124.
Independent Claims 1, 12: Bulmahn discloses a metering unit (Fig. 3) for a seed drill used by the drain method of claim 12, the metering unit comprising at least:
-an airtight casing (7, 18) comprising at least a fixed part (7) and a door (18) that can be moved between an open position and a closed position,
-a metering element (9) for a plurality of granular elements, arranged for discrete and singular distribution of a plurality of granular elements, the metering element being placed inside the casing to separate the interior of the casing into a first chamber (the side of 7) and a second chamber (the side of 18), which are different, the first chamber being configured to receive all or part of the plurality of granular elements at least in a reserve zone (at 10), and the second chamber being closed with the door in its closed position (Fig. 4) and being open with the door in its open position (Fig. 5),
-a drain chute (16) mounted on the outside of the fixed part of the casing, preferably on the side of the second chamber, by at least one assembly element (15), the buffer zone (the downstream zone of 16) having a buffer height less than the reserve height (at the inner or attachment end of 16, as seen in Figs. 3, 6), as per claim 1.
However, Bulmahn fails to disclose wherein the metering unit is characterized in that the drain chute is configured so that it can be positioned in an intermediate drain position, in which the drain chute is configured to allow the flow of all or part of the plurality of granular elements initially present in the reserve zone towards a buffer zone of the drain chute and to allow the storage of said granular elements in the buffer zone without them flowing directly out of the drain chute, as per claim 1.
Ringwood discloses a similar drain chute (4, 5, Fig. 2) configured so that it can be positioned in an intermediate drain position (page 2, lines 80-88), in which the drain chute is configured to allow the flow of all or part of the plurality of granular elements initially present in the reserve zone (at the bottom of the box) towards a buffer zone (midway of the chute 4, 5) of the drain chute and to allow the storage of said granular elements in the buffer zone without them flowing directly out of the drain chute (as positioned intermediately by the operator), as per claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the intermediate positions taught by Ringwood for the chute of Bulmahn in order to distribute material gradually and at varying rates.
Dependent Claims 2-5, 9: Bulmahn further discloses wherein at least in the intermediate drain position (when combined with Ringwood), the drain chute (16) is removably mounted from the fixed part (7) of the casing (7, 18) by the at least one assembly element (15), preferably maneuverable with just one hand so as to be detachable from the fixed part of the casing (by unhooking the chute from the fixed part), as per claim 2.
Ringwood, of the resultant combination above, further discloses wherein the drain chute (4, 5) can be positioned in an outflow position (its lowermost position), configured to allow the flow, towards a discharge zone (the ground or field) of a lower discharge height relative to the buffer height (the height midway of the chute 4, 5), of all or part of the plurality of granular elements initially present in the reserve zone (at the bottom of the box) or the buffer zone (midway down the chute 4, 5), the discharge zone being located outside of the drain chute, as per claim 3;
wherein in the intermediate drain position (described in page 2, lines 80-88), the drain chute (4, 5) is horizontal or tilted by what is known as an intermediate angle of inclination (when combined with Bulmahn, any intermediate angles that are not low enough to distribute granular elements), preventing the flow of granular element(s) out of the drain chute, as per claim 4;
wherein in the outflow position (the lowermost position of chute 4, 5), the drain chute (4, 5) is tilted by what is known as a flow angle of inclination, allowing the flow of granular element(s), which is greater than the angle of inclination known as intermediate angle of inclination (as described in page 2, lines 80-88), as per claim 5;
wherein the drain chute (4, 5) is mounted so as to be mobile, preferably in rotation by the at least one assembly element (4’), which can preferably be maneuvered with just one hand (via lever 8), to be positioned in the intermediate drain position (as described in page 2, lines 80-88), in the outflow position (the chutes lowermost position), and between said positions (page 2, lines 80-88), without requiring the drain chute to be detached from the box, as per claim 9.
Dependent Claims 10-11: Bulmahn discloses a seeder element (3) comprising at least one hopper (5, 6) arranged to contain a plurality of granular elements and being connected by conveying means (a bottom opening of hopper 6) to said metering unit, wherein the metering unit is in accordance with claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above under Bulmahn in view of Ringwood), as per claim 10;
A seed drill (2) comprising at least one chassis (4) on which at least one seeder element (3) is mounted, wherein the at least one seeder element is in accordance with claim 10 (see the rejection of claim 10 immediately above), as per claim 11.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached PTOL-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alicia M. Torres whose telephone number is 571-272-6997. The examiner’s fax number is 571-273-6997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina R. Fulton, can be reached at (571) 272-7376.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the group receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-3600. The fax number for this Group is 571-273-8300.
/Alicia Torres/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 August 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights