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 Status
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 17-26, and 28 are currently being examined. By applicant’s amendment of December 03, 2025, claims 1-3, 5-10, 17-26, and 28 are pending following:
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-8, 10, 17, 20-26, and 28 have been amended.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/02/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on December 03, 2025 have been fully considered as below.
Applicant argues that the objection to the drawings should not be maintained in view of the amendments (page 11 of Remarks). However, the amended drawings were not included in the attached replacement sheets. Therefore, the objection to the drawings is maintained below.
Applicant argues that the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) to the claims should not be maintained in view of the amendments (page 11 of Remarks). This argument is persuasive. Therefore, the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) is not maintained.
Applicant argues that the rejections under 35 USC 103 to claims 1-3, 5-10 and 28 should not be maintained in view of the amendments (pages 12-13 of Remarks). Upon further consideration of the teachings of the cited references in view of the amended claimed language, the rejections under 35 USC 103 to claims 1-3, 5-10 and 28 are not maintained.
Applicant argues that the rejections under 35 USC 103 to claims 17-20 should not be maintained in view of the amendments (pages 12-14 of Remarks). The arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection provided below, in light of newly found prior art, which was necessitated based on Applicant's amendments which changed the scope of the claims.
Applicant argues that the rejections under 35 USC 103 to claims 21-23 should not be maintained in view of the amendments (pages 12-14 of Remarks). The arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant alleges the cited prior art does not disclose the newly added limitation to claim 21, see page 14 of Remarks. Examiner respectfully disagrees that the prior art fails to disclose (or teach) the newly added limitation to claim 21 for the reasons in the updated grounds of rejection below. Therefore, the rejections under 35 USC 103 to claims 21-23 are maintained.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 1) reference number 111 in Fig. 1; 2) reference number 130 in Fig. 3; 3) reference number 140 in Fig. 4. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, 7-10, 17, 20-21, and 23-26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 4 of claim 3 should be ended with a semicolon -- ; --;
Line 9 of claim 10, “the geographic location, heading, and speed of the harvester” should read “the geographic location, the heading, and the speed of the harvester” to avoid insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim;
Claims 2-3, 5, and 8-10, the claims should be added a comma --,-- in front of “wherein”. For example, “The material loading vehicle of claim 1, wherein”;
The claims should be removed extra space. For example, in claim 2, there is extra space between “claim 1“ and “wherein”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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:
“fill level detector configured to …” in claim 21;
“fill parameter generator configured to …” in claim 21;
“communication system that communicates …” in claim 21.
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.
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 § 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.
Claims 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuestefeld et al. (US 20120200697 A1, hereinafter “Wuestefeld”), and further in view of Suleman et al. (US 20200178049 A1, hereinafter “Suleman”).
Regarding claim 17, Wuestefeld teaches a computer implemented method of controlling a material loading vehicle (Wuestefeld, see at least Fig. 1, abstract), the computer implemented method comprising:
sensing a fill level of material in a first receiving vehicle that is receiving material from the material loading vehicle (Wuestefeld, see at least Figs. 1, 2A, par. [0018, 0019], “When two cameras (e.g. 205, 210) are used, stereo images may be used to estimate surface contours such as those represented by dotted line 220. Alternatively, laser scanners or 3D video systems may also be used to estimate surface contours”);
generating a fill level sensor signal indicative of the sensed fill level of material in the first receiving vehicle (Wuestefeld, see at least Figs. 1, 2A, par. [0018, 0019], “When two cameras (e.g. 205, 210) are used, stereo images may be used to estimate surface contours such as those represented by dotted line 220. Alternatively, laser scanners or 3D video systems may also be used to estimate surface contours”);
detecting a current overall fill level in the first receiving vehicle based on the fill level sensor signal (Wuestefeld, see at least par. [0020-0021], detecting current overall fill level, i.e. volume of material in bin 215, based on dotted line 225 represents the shape of the surface of material in the bin in analogy to line 220 and reference marks; par. [0027], “The video systems of FIG. 2 may be combined with image analysis software running on a processor to provide accurate estimates of material volume in a bin”);
obtaining a plurality of historic overall fill levels, each historic overall fill level, of the plurality of historic overall fill levels, representing a prior overall fill level in the first receiving vehicle at a previous time corresponding to the prior overall fill level (Wuestefeld, see at least par. [0027], “The video systems of FIG. 2 may be combined with image analysis software running on a processor to provide accurate estimates of material volume in a bin. The time derivative of the estimated volume of material in a bin gives an estimate for the rate of material flow into the bin”);
determining a fill rate based on the plurality of historic overall fill levels (Wuestefeld, see at least par. [0027], “The video systems of FIG. 2 may be combined with image analysis software running on a processor to provide accurate estimates of material volume in a bin. The time derivative of the estimated volume of material in a bin gives an estimate for the rate of material flow into the bin”);
generating a first receiving vehicle fill parameter representing the first receiving vehicle based on the current overall fill level and the fill rate based on the plurality of historic overall fill levels (Wuestefeld, see at least Figs. 7A-B, par. [0045], generating a video display represents receiving vehicle fill parameter, i.e. current fill level and estimated time to full at the current fill rate “In FIG. 7 at "A" a message ("23 MIN TO FULL") indicating that the bin shown will be full in 23 minutes at the current fill rate is shown”); and
communicating the receiving vehicle fill parameter to other farm equipment, e.g. a second harvester or a display in another grain cart, via a wireless system (Wuestefeld, see at least Fig. 6, par. [0039-0042, 0047]).
Wuestefeld does not teach a mobile application running on a mobile device.
In a related field of endeavor, Suleman teaches a method for coordinating an agricultural operation by communicating the first receiving vehicle fill parameter, e.g., fill weight, fill height, capacity level 206, of a first receiving vehicle 12 to a mobile application 200 running on a mobile device in a second receiving vehicle 12 (Suleman, see at least Figs. 5, 7, par. [0001, 0015, 0048-0052]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Wuestefeld to incorporate the teachings of Suleman to communicate the receiving vehicle fill parameter to a mobile application running on a mobile device in another receiving vehicle as taught by Suleman. This modification would allow to more efficiently coordinate the agricultural vehicles.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Wuestefeld and Suleman teaches all the limitation of claim 17. The combination of Wuestefeld and Suleman further teaches:
capturing an image of a worksite; generating a camera signal indicative of the captured image (Wuestefeld, see at least Figs. 1, 2, par. [0018, 0019], cameras 205/210 capture an image of a worksite, e.g. a bin of a receiving vehicle during material collection, and generate a camera signal indicative of the captured image);
generating an estimated volumetric flow rate of material through the material loading vehicle based on the camera signal (Wuestefeld, see at least par. [0027], “The video systems of FIG. 2 may be combined with image analysis software running on a processor to provide accurate estimates of material volume in a bin. The time derivative of the estimated volume of material in a bin gives an estimate for the rate of material flow into the bin”); and
generating a fill rate indicator based on the estimated volumetric flow rate of material through the material loading vehicle (Wuestefeld, see at least Figs. 7A-B, par. [0027, 0045], generating a video display represents receiving vehicle fill parameter, i.e. current fill level and estimated time to full at the current fill rate “In FIG. 7 at "A" a message ("23 MIN TO FULL") indicating that the bin shown will be full in 23 minutes at the current fill rate is shown”).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuestefeld et al. (US 20120200697 A1, hereinafter “Wuestefeld”), in view of Suleman et al. (US 20200178049 A1, hereinafter “Suleman”) as applied to claim 17, and further in view of Masolek et al. (US 20170009408 A1, hereinafter “Marsolek”).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Wuestefeld and Suleman teaches all the limitation of claim 17. The combination of Wuestefeld and Suleman does not teach receiving a flow rate indicator indicative of a volumetric flow rate of material through the material loading vehicle; and generating, based on the flow rate indicator, a fill rate indicator indicative of a rate at which the first receiving vehicle is being filled with the material from the material loading vehicle.
In a related field of endeavor, Marsolek teaches a method for receiving a flow rate indicator indicative of a volumetric flow rate of material through the material loading vehicle (Masolek, see at least par. [0026], receiving a signal indicative of an amount of material being transferred into the first receiving vehicle 16 via conveyor 48 based on data from sensor 60); and generating, based on the flow rate indicator, a fill rate indicator indicative of a rate at which the first receiving vehicle is being filled with the material from the material loading vehicle (Masolek, see at least par. [0026], determining a volume flow rate based on signal generated by sensor 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Wuestefeld and Suleman to incorporate the teachings of Marsolek to receive a flow rate indicator indicative of a volumetric flow rate of material through the material loading vehicle; and generate, based on the flow rate indicator, a fill rate indicator indicative of a rate at which the first receiving vehicle is being filled with the material from the material loading vehicle as taught by Marsolek. This modification would allow to present information of the first receiving vehicle to an operator of the second receiving vehicle for dispatching the second receiving vehicle.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Wuestefeld, Suleman, and Marsolek teaches all the limitation of claims 17 and 18. The combination of Wuestefeld, Suleman, and Marsolek further teaches detecting a flow of material through the material loading vehicle; and generating, as the flow rate indicator, a flow sensor signal indicative of the sensed flow of material through the material loading vehicle (Masolek, see at least par. [0026], detecting and generating a signal indicative of an amount of material being transferred into the first receiving vehicle 16 via conveyor 48 by the sensor 60).
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suleman et al. (US 20200178049 A1, hereinafter “Suleman”), and further in view of Christiansen et al. (US 20240037806 A1, hereinafter “Christiansen”).
Regarding claim 21, Suleman teaches a material loading system (Suleman, see at least Figs. 1, 2, 5, 7, par. [0016, 0026], a material loading system 30 includes agricultural vehicles 8, i.e. a plurality of harvesters 10 and haul vehicles 12 within a field) comprising:
a material conveyance subsystem configured to convey material from a material loading vehicle to a first receiving vehicle through a spout (Suleman, see at least Fig. 2, par. [0016], the harvester vehicle 10 may include a conveyor 26 that outputs the harvested crops to the haul vehicle 12);
a communication system that communicates the first receiving vehicle fill parameter to a mobile application running on a mobile device in a second receiving vehicle in the material loading system (Suleman, see at least Figs. 1, 2, 5, 7, par. [0019-0020, 0049], a network 30 may enable communication of data between the agricultural vehicles 8, i.e. a harvester 10 and a plurality of haul vehicles 12. The data could be the fill level 206 of the storage compartment of a first haul vehicle 12 displayed on a user interface 200 running on a mobile device in a second haul vehicle 12 in the material loading system 30), wherein the mobile application is configured to:
receive a plurality of different fill parameters (Suleman, see at least Fig. 5, par. [0020], “The network 30 may enable communication of data between the agricultural vehicles 8 using the communication protocol 32. For example, in some embodiments, each agricultural vehicle 8 connected to the network 30 may communicate data such as a name, a pairing status (e.g., paired or unpaired), a connection strength, a position, the type of agricultural vehicle, a heading, a role (e.g., relative to other agricultural vehicles 8 in the network 30), a calibration status (e.g., whether an agricultural vehicle 8 is ready to be paired), a distance to other vehicles and/or to compatible agricultural vehicles 8 (e.g., a distance from a harvester vehicle 10 to a haul vehicle 12), or a combination thereof, associated with the agricultural vehicle 8”; par. [0049], “For example, the status indicator 206 may provide information regarding capacity level (e.g., fill level of the storage compartment of the haul vehicle) (e.g., 25 percent full, 100 percent full, etc.) and may provide information regarding whether the haul vehicle may be additionally filled (e.g., “can be filled, “can't be filled,” etc.)”; Fig. 7, par. [0054], “For example, the status indicator 206 may include information regarding the capacity level of the harvester vehicle 10 (e.g., 33, 67, 50, and 100 percent full, 100 percent full, etc.)”), wherein each respective fill parameter of the plurality of different fill parameters:
corresponds to a respective material loading vehicle of a plurality of different material loading vehicles (Suleman, see at least Fig. 7, par. [0054], “In some embodiments, the icons 204 corresponding to the agricultural vehicles 8 may be selectable (e.g., via a touchscreen, external buttons, etc.). In the illustrated embodiment, the controller may instruct the display to present icons 204 corresponding to four compatible harvester vehicles 10 and one haul vehicle 12. The icons 204 may include a corresponding status indicator 206. For example, the status indicator 206 may include information regarding the capacity level of the harvester vehicle 10 (e.g., 33, 67, 50, and 100 percent full, 100 percent full, etc.)”),
identify a particular material loading vehicle, of the plurality of different material loading vehicles (Suleman, see at least Fig. 7, par, [0020, 0054-0056], the user interface displays a map 202 includes icons 204 corresponding to each of the agricultural vehicles 8 in operation within the field 14. Each icon 204 may include an identifier to facilitate determination of an identity of the corresponding agricultural vehicle 8, i.e., Edward’s harvester), based on:
a location of the second receiving vehicle (Suleman, see at least abstract, par. [0020, 0023, 0056], a position of the second haul vehicle 12 and distance from the second haul vehicle 12 to Edward’s harvester, i.e. 67 feet),
a respective location of each of the plurality of different material loading vehicles (Suleman, see at least abstract, each icon 204 of the agricultural vehicles 8 at a location on the map corresponding to a position of the agricultural vehicles 8 within the field, i.e. a plurality of harvesters 10), and
the plurality of different fill parameters (Suleman, see at least Fig. 7, par. [0054], “The icons 204 may include a corresponding status indicator 206. For example, the status indicator 206 may include information regarding the capacity level of the harvester vehicle 10 (e.g., 33, 67, 50, and 100 percent full, 100 percent full, etc.)”; par. [0055], “While in the illustrated embodiment, the controller may instruct the display to present specific percentages, such as 0, 25, 50, 75, and 100 percent, in further embodiments, the controller may instruct the display to present any suitable percentage values or another suitable indicator of fill quantity (e.g., fill weight, fill height, etc.)”); and
display the respective fill parameter received from the particular material loading vehicle (Suleman, see at least Figs. 5, 7, par. [0054-0056], the user interface 250 displays a window of detailed information 208 include information such as the fill level (e.g. percent full) associated with the agricultural vehicle 8 (e.g. a haul vehicle 12/a harvester 10) corresponding to the selected icon 204).
Suleman does not teach a fill sensor configured to generate a fill level sensor signal indicative of a fill level of material in the first receiving vehicle; a fill level detector configured to identify a fill level in the first receiving vehicle based on the fill level sensor signal; a fill parameter generator configured to generate a first receiving vehicle fill parameter relative to a given fill level of the first receiving vehicle; and wherein each respective fill parameter of the plurality of different fill parameters: indicates at least one of: a respective fill location where a respective receiving vehicle, being filled by the respective material loading vehicle, will reach a respective given fill level, or a respective fill time when the respective receiving vehicle will reach the respective given fill level.
In a related field of endeavor, Christiansen teaches:
a fill sensor configured to generate a fill level sensor signal indicative of a fill level of material in the first receiving vehicle (Christiansen, at least Figs. 12, 14, 15, par. [0082-0083], module 86 includes a two-dimensional light detecting and ranging (LiDAR) scanner that generates a series of data points indicative of a fill level of the first receiving vehicle);
a fill level detector configured to identify a fill level in the first receiving vehicle based on the fill level sensor signal (Christiansen, at least par. [0083], the controller 44 is configured to determine the fill level of the first receiving vehicle based on data generated by the module 86);
a fill parameter generator configured to generate a first receiving vehicle fill parameter relative to a given fill level of the first receiving vehicle (Christiansen, at least Fig. 16, par. [0088, 0089], the controller 44 is configured to generate a visual representation of the status grain cart 1 of the first receiving vehicle, such as how much time is required to completely fill the first receiving vehicle, remaining space of the grain bin, grain amount, and curved line 98 depicts the distribution of the grain);
a communication system that communicates the first receiving vehicle fill parameter to a mobile application running on a mobile device (Christiansen, see at least Fig. 2, par. [0043, 0047], “The communications gateway 58 enables wireless communications with other machines such as other harvesters or tractors, with external devices such as laptop or tablet computers or smartphones, and with external communications networks such as a cellular telephone network or Wi-Fi network”; Figs. 9, 16, par. [0065-0066], “[…] the harvester 10 may be in wireless communication with the receiving vehicle and with a portable electronic device 82 wherein a computing device on the harvester 10 generates and communicates the graphical representation to the receiving vehicle, to the portable electronic device, or both as a wireless communication. The portable electronic device 82 may be placed in the operator cabin 26 of the harvester 10, in the operator cabin of the tractor 34, or another location that is not in the harvester 10 or in the tractor 34. The portable electronic device 82 receives the graphic data from the harvester 10 through a wireless transceiver on the portable electronic device”), wherein the mobile application is configured to: receive a plurality of different fill parameters, wherein each respective fill parameter of the plurality of different fill parameters, wherein each respective fill parameter of the plurality of different fill parameters: indicates a respective fill time when the respective receiving vehicle will reach the respective given fill level (Christiansen, see at least Fig. 16, par. [0088-0089], a visual presentation of the fill level of the grain bin of the grain cart 1, such as how much time is required to completely fill the receiving vehicle, remaining space of the grain bin, grain amount, and curved line 98 depicts the distribution of the grain in the grain bin).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Suleman to incorporate the teachings of Christiansen to determine the receiving vehicle fill parameter such as fill level and how much time is required to completely fill the receiving vehicle, and to communicate the receiving vehicle fill parameter to a mobile application running on a mobile device in other vehicle as taught by Christiansen. This modification would allow to more efficiently accomplish the docking and unloading operation of the agricultural vehicles.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Suleman and Christiansen teaches all the limitation of claim 21. The combination of Suleman and Christiansen further teaches wherein the mobile application is configured to: receive the first receiving vehicle fill parameter; and control a user interface display mechanism to generate a user interface output indicative of the first receiving vehicle fill parameter (Suleman, see at least Fig. 5, par. [0043], “In response to selection (process block 94) of an icon, the controller may instruct the display to present (process block 96) information associated with the agricultural vehicle corresponding to the selected icon. The presented information may include information helpful in deciding whether to pair with the selected agricultural vehicle. For example, an operator of a harvester vehicle may select an icon corresponding to a compatible agricultural vehicle, such as a haul vehicle. As a result, information associated with the haul vehicle, such as the capacity level (e.g., percent full), paired status, network signal strength, current state, and the like, may be presented”).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Suleman and Christiansen teaches all the limitation of claims 21 and 22. The combination of Suleman and Christiansen further teaches wherein the first receiving vehicle fill parameter comprises a fill time value indicative of a first fill time when the first receiving vehicle will reach the given fill level (Christiansen, at least Figs. 2, 16, par. [0044, 0065, 0088], user interface 48 may include one or more touchscreen displays capable of presenting visual representations of cart status, such as fill level and/or how much time is required to completely fill the receiving the vehicle), and wherein the mobile application running on the mobile device in the second receiving vehicle is configured to:
displaying a time value indicator indicative of the first fill time (Christiansen, at least Fig. 2, 9, 16, par. [0043-0044, 0047, 0065-0066, 0088], user interface 48 may include one or more touchscreen displays capable of presenting visual representations of cart status, such as fill level and/or how much time is required to completely fill the receiving the vehicle to a second receiving vehicles since the harvester and the receiving vehicles include “[t]he communications gateway 58 enables wireless communications with other machines such as other harvesters or tractors, with external devices such as laptop or tablet computers or smartphones”, and “[…] the harvester 10 may be in wireless communication with the receiving vehicle and with a portable electronic device 82 wherein a computing device on the harvester 10 generates and communicates the graphical representation to the receiving vehicle, to the portable electronic device, or both as a wireless communication. The portable electronic device 82 may be placed in the operator cabin 26 of the harvester 10, in the operator cabin of the tractor 34, or another location that is not in the harvester 10 or in the tractor 34. The portable electronic device 82 receives the graphic data from the harvester 10 through a wireless transceiver on the portable electronic device”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-10 and 28 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim objection.
Claims 24-26 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 prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hanrieder (US 20220122197 A1) teaches a system comprises a first portable electronic device associated with an agricultural harvester and a second portable electronic device associated with a crop transport vehicle. At least one of the first portable electronic device and the second portable electronic device is configured to receive a geographic position of the other portable electronic device and, using only the first geographic position and the second geographic position, identify a harvesting operation performed by the agricultural harvester; determine a harvesting distance, a harvesting duration of time, or both of the harvesting operation; and estimate a current fill level of the crop transport vehicle based on the harvesting distance, the harvesting duration of time, or both.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRANG DANG whose telephone number is (703)756-1049. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Khoi Tran can be reached at (571)272-6919. 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.
/TRANG DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3656 /KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656