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 § 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 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of Berggren (US 2019/0064795 A1) and LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr).
Regarding claim 1, Barrick discloses an agricultural harvester (Section 0016 lines 10-16 discloses that the vehicle [12] may be an agricultural harvester or any suitable vehicle.), comprising:
a frame (chassis) configured to support a crop processing system (as would be necessary for an agricultural harvester);
a sensor [102] supported on the frame (Page 2 section 0019 discloses that the sensor may be located anywhere on the agricultural harvester [12]), the sensor [102] configured to capture data on the soil present within the field across which the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) is traveling (Page 4 section 0032 lines 1-10 and lines 25-28 disclose the sensor [102] senses the moisture content at different depths in the soil.);
and a computing system [108] communicatively coupled to the sensor [102] (as disclosed on page 3 section 0026), the computing system [108] configured to:
and generate a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on soil data (Page 6 section 0043 lines 11-18 disclose the moisture levels which create the map adjusts the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] of the implement [10].), the tillage prescription map prescribing a penetration depth for a tillage tool [32, 34] at a plurality of locations within the field (Page 6 section 0044 lines discloses that the controller [108] controls the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] based on the soil moisture content sensed which makes up the tillage prescription map.).
However, Barrick does not disclose wherein the agricultural harvester comprises a frame configured to support a crop processing system;
front wheels coupled to the frame;
rear wheels coupled to the frame;
a crop processing system supported on the frame, the crop processing system including a threshing and separating assembly configured to thresh and separate harvested crop;
a straw hood supported on the frame through which impurities from the harvested crop are discharged;
the sensor configured to capture data indicative of a B-horizon present within the field across which the agricultural harvester is traveling;
wherein the sensor is positioned aft of the rear wheels and adjacent to the straw hood;
wherein the computing system identifies the B-horizon within the field based on the data captured by the sensor;
and generates a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on the B-horizon.
Examiner takes official notice that it is known in the art of agricultural harvesting that agricultural harvesters commonly comprise front and rear wheels coupled to the frame, a crop processing system supported on the frame, and a straw hood supported on the frame. However, for argument’s sake, Berggren discloses agricultural harvester [10] comprises a frame [14] configured to support a crop processing system [24];
front wheels [16] coupled to the frame [14];
rear wheels [18] coupled to the frame [14];
a crop processing system [24] supported on the frame [14], the crop processing system [24] including a threshing and separating assembly [24] configured to thresh and separate harvested crop (as disclosed on page 2 section 0025 lines 6-12);
a straw hood [54] supported on the frame through which impurities from the harvested crop are discharged (as disclosed on page 3 section 0026 lines 7-11);
a controller [202] connected to a sensors, and towing capability (as seen in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Berggren’s agricultural harvester capable of towing for Barrick’s agricultural harvester as Barrick discloses that the vehicle pulling the towing implement may be any suitable vehicle including an agricultural harvester (Section 0016 lines 10-16).
LogicGeo discloses a ground penetrating radar sensor that senses can detect layers of gravel and bedrock (Page 9, Stratigraphic Imaging section, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute for Barrick’s soil moisture content sensor for LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor for sensing bedrock and gravel in order to identify soil layers/characteristics and management of soil for agricultural purposes (Page 16, Additional GPR Applications and Experience section, lines 10 & 16).
The resultant combination discloses an agricultural harvester, comprising:
a frame [14, Berggren] configured to support a crop processing system [24, Berggren];
front wheels [16, Berggren] coupled to the frame [14, Berggren];
rear wheels [18, Berggren] coupled to the frame [Berggren];
a crop processing system [24, Berggren] supported on the frame [14, Berggren], the crop processing system [24, Berggren] including a threshing and separating assembly [24, Berggren] configured to thresh and separate harvested crop (as disclosed on page 2 section 0025 lines 6-12 of Berggren);
a straw hood [54, Berggren] supported on the frame [14, Berggren], through which impurities from the harvested crop are discharged (as disclosed on page 3 section 0026 lines 7-11 of Berggren);
a sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo] supported on the frame [14, Berggren] and positioned aft of the rear wheels [18, Berggren] and adjacent to the straw hood [54, Berggren] (Barrick’s page 2 section 0019 discloses that the sensor may be located anywhere on the agricultural harvester [12]), the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo] configured to capture data indicative of a B-horizon present within the field across which the agricultural harvester is traveling (LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor detects gravel or bedrock which is considered to be the B-horizon according to the applicant’s specification section 0021);
and a computing system [108, Barrick] communicatively coupled to the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo], wherein the computing system [108, Barrick]:
identifies the B-horizon within the field based on the data captured by the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo];
and generates a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on the identified B-horizon (Barrick’s page 6 section 0042 lines 1-4 discloses the creation of a map based on filed location and the sensor input which has been replaced by LogicGeo’s B-horizon sensor at various locations within the field.), the tillage prescription map prescribing a penetration depth for a tillage tool [32, 34, Barrick] at a plurality of locations within the field (Barrick’s page 6 section 0044 lines discloses that the controller [108] controls the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] based on the input from the sensor which has been replaced with LogicGeo’s B-horizon sensor which makes up the tillage prescription map.).
Regarding claim 2, Barrick, Berggren, and LogicGeo disclose the agricultural harvester of claim 1, wherein the sensor (as disclosed by LogicGeo ) comprises a non-contact-based sensor (Page 9, Stratigraphic Imaging section, lines 1-5) (Radar sensors are non-contact based.).
Regarding claim 5, Barrick, Berggren, and LogicGeo disclose the agricultural harvester of claim 1, wherein the sensor corresponds to a first sensor supported at a first location on the frame and configured to capture first data (Barrick’s page 4 section 0032 lines 1-10 and lines 25-28 disclose a sensor, which has been replaced with LogicGeo’s sensor for detecting gravel or clay located below the seedbed i.e. the B-horizon according to the instant application’s specification, as the agricultural harvester travels across the field.), the agricultural harvester further comprising:
a second sensor supported on the frame at a second location, the second sensor configured to capture second data indicative of the B- horizon present within the field across which the agricultural harvester is traveling (Barrick’s page 4 section 0032 lines 1-10 and lines 25-28 disclose a sensor, which has been replaced with LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor for detecting the B-horizon, as the agricultural harvester travels across the field. Barrick’s page 2 section 0019 lines 24-27 teaches the sensor may be located anywhere on the agricultural harvester. This includes a second location on the chassis).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of Berggren (US 2019/0064795 A1) and LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Anderson (US 2022/0022362).
Regarding claim 3, Barrick, Berggren, and LogicGeo disclose the agricultural harvester of claim 2.
However, Barrick, Berggren, and LogicGeo do not disclose wherein the sensor comprises a ground-penetrating radar sensing device and an electromagnetic induction sensing device.
Anderson discloses a vehicle [20] wherein the sensor [22] comprises away to sense soil compaction using a ground-penetrating radar sensing device and an electromagnetic induction sensing device (Page 2 section 0018 lines 1-9 discloses the sensor can comprise a ground-penetrating radar sensor and an electromagnetic induction sensing device for the purpose of determining a prescription of tillage in an area of soil.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Anderson’s method of using an electromagnetic induction sensing device with a ground penetrating radar sensor to Barrick, Berggren’s and LogicGeo’s combine with a sole radar ground penetrating sensor in order to gain more accurate soil readings as each sensing method has shortcomings (Page 2 section 0018 lines 11-13) therefore it would be obvious to use more than one.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (US 2020/0236836), Berggren (US 2019/0064795 A1), LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr), and Anderson (US 2022/022362) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of LaPrade (US 10649079).
Regarding claim 4, Barrick, Berggren, LogicGeo, and Anderson disclose the agricultural harvester of claim 3.
However, Barrick, Berggren, LogicGeo, and Anderson do not disclose wherein the ground-penetrating radar sensing device corresponds to a first ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a first frequency, the sensor further comprising a second ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a second frequency, the second frequency differing from the first frequency.
LaPrade discloses a ground-penetrating radar sensing device [300] comprising a first ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a first frequency, the sensor further comprising a second ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a second frequency, the second frequency differing from the first frequency (Column 6 lines 1-6 disclose that there may be more than one radar emitting pedal (ground-penetrating radar sensing device), each pedal being programmable to a different frequency. Column 14 lines 4-10 disclose that the second frequency emitted may be used to scan at a second deeper depth.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply LaPrade’s concept of operating two ground-penetrating radar sensing devices at two different frequencies to Anderson’s ground-penetrating radar sensing device in order to be able to test soil compaction at different depths.
Claims 6-7, 10, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr).
Regarding claim 6, Barrick discloses a system for generating tillage prescription maps, the system comprising:
an agricultural harvester (Section 0016 lines 10-16 discloses that the vehicle [12] may be an agricultural harvester or any suitable vehicle.) configured to travel across a field to perform an agricultural harvesting operation on the field;
a sensor [102] supported on the agricultural harvester (Page 2 section 0019 discloses that the sensor may be located anywhere on the agricultural harvester [12]), the sensor [102] configured to capture data indicative of one or more subsurface soil layers present within the field across which the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) is traveling (Page 4 section 0032 lines 1-10 and lines 25-28 disclose the sensor [102] senses the moisture content at different depths in the soil, different moisture content levels at different depths are considered to be different subsurface soil layers.);
and a tillage implement [10] configured to travel across the field to perform a tillage operation on the field, the tillage implement [10] including a tillage tool [32, 34];
and a computing system [108] communicatively coupled to the sensor [102] (as disclosed on page 3 section 0026), the computing system [108] configured to:
control an operation of the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) such that the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) travels across the field to perform the harvesting operation (The operation being the tilling);
receive data from the sensor [102] that is indicative of one or more subsurface soil layers present within the field as the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) travels across the field (Page 4 section 0032 lines 1-7 disclose that the controller [108] receives the moisture data representing the subsurface soil layers from sensor [102] while the agricultural harvester [12] is traveling.);
identify the one or more subsurface soil layers within the field based on the data captured by the sensor [102] (Page 4 section 0032 lines 1-10 and lines 25-28 disclose the sensor [102] senses the moisture content at different depths in the soil, different moisture content levels at different depths are considered to be different subsurface soil layers.);
and generate a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on the identified one or more subsurface soil layers (Page 6 section 0042 lines 1-4 discloses the creation of a map based on filed location and the moisture content at various depths within the field.), the tillage prescription map prescribing a penetration depth for a tillage tool at a plurality of locations within the field (Page 6 section 0043 lines 11-18 disclose the moisture levels which create the map adjusts the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] of the implement [10].);
and control a penetration depth of the tillage tool based on the tillage prescription map (Page 6 section 0044 lines discloses that the controller [108] controls the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] based on the moisture content sensed which makes up the tillage prescription map.).
However, Barrick does not disclose wherein the sensor is configured to capture data indicative of a B-horizon in which to make a prescription map for the tillage tool.
LogicGeo discloses a ground penetrating radar sensor that senses can detect layers of gravel and bedrock (Page 9, Stratigraphic Imaging section, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute for Barrick’s soil moisture content sensor for LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor for sensing bedrock and gravel in order to identify soil layers/characteristics and management of soil for agricultural purposes (Page 16, Additional GPR Applications and Experience section, lines 10 & 16).
The resultant combination discloses a system for generating tillage prescription maps,
the system comprising:
an agricultural harvester [12, Barrick] configured to travel across a field to perform an agricultural harvesting operation on the field;
a sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo] supported on the agricultural harvester [12, Barrick], the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo] configured to capture data indicative of at least one of a B-horizon present within the field across which the agricultural harvester [12, Barrick] is traveling (LogicGeo’s sensor detects rock or gravel below a seed bed which is considered to be the B-horizon according to section 0021 of applicant’s specification);
a tillage implement configured to travel across the field to perform a tillage operation on the field, the tillage implement including a tillage tool [32, 34, Barrick];
and a computing system [108, Barrick] communicatively coupled to the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo], the computing system [108, Barrick] configured to:
controls an operation of the agricultural harvester [12, Barrick] such that the agricultural harvester [12, Barrick] travels across the field to perform the harvesting operation;
receives data from the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo] that is indicative of the at least one of the compaction layer or the B-horizon present within the field as the agricultural harvester [12, Barrick] travels across the field;
identifies the at least one of the B-horizon within the field based on the data captured by the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo] (Barrick’s page 4 section 0032 lines 1-7 disclose that the controller [108] receives the data representing from LogicGeo’s sensor while the agricultural harvester [12, Barrick] is traveling.);
generates a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on the identified at least one of the B-horizon, the tillage prescription map prescribing a penetration depth for a tillage tool at a plurality of locations within the field (Barrick’s page 6 section 0042 lines 1-4 discloses the creation of a map based on filed location and the sensor input which has been replaced by LogicGeo’s B-horizon sensor at various locations within the field.);
and controls a penetration depth of the tillage tool based on the tillage prescription map (Barrick’s page 6 section 0044 lines discloses that the controller [108] controls the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] based on the input from the sensor which has been replaced with LogicGeo’s B-horizon sensor which makes up the tillage prescription map.).
Regarding claim 7, Barrick and LogicGeo disclose the system of claim 6, wherein the sensor comprises a non-contact- based sensor (LogicGeo’s sensor is radar which is non-contact.).
Regarding claim 10, Barrick and LogicGeo disclose the system of claim 6, wherein, when identifying the at least one of the compaction layer or the B-horizon, the computing system [108, Barrick] generates a representation of the soil within the field based on the data captured by the sensor [LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor], the representation depicting the least one of the compaction layer or the B-horizon (Barrick’s page 6 section 0042 discloses the creation of a map based on filed location and the sensor input at various depths within the field. The moisture sensor has been substituted with LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor.).
Regarding claim 16, Barrick and LogicGeo discloses the system of claim 6, wherein the tillage tool [32, 34, Barrick] comprises a ground- penetrating shank [34, Barrick].
Regarding claim 17, Barrick discloses a method for generating tillage prescription maps using an agricultural harvester (Section 0016 lines 10-16 discloses that the vehicle [12] may be an agricultural harvester or any suitable vehicle.), the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) including a frame (chassis) and a sensor supported on the frame (chassis) (Page 2 section 0019 discloses that the sensor may be located anywhere on the agricultural harvester [12]), the method comprising:
controlling, with a computing system [108], an operation of the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) such that the agricultural harvester travels (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) across a field to perform a harvesting operation thereon;
receiving, with the computing system [108], data from the sensor [102] that is indicative of the soil moisture content within the field as the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in section 0016 lines 10-16) travels across the field (Page 4 section 0032 lines 1-10 and lines 25-28 disclose the sensor [102] senses the moisture content at different depths in the soil.);
identifying, with the computing system [108], the one or more soil characteristic within the field based on the received data (as discussed above);
and generating, with the computing system [108], a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on the identified soil characteristic (Page 6 section 0042 lines 1-4 discloses the creation of a map based on filed location and the moisture content at various depths within the field.), the tillage prescription map prescribing a penetration depth for a tillage tool [32, 34] at a plurality of locations within the field (Page 6 section 0043 lines 11-18 disclose the moisture levels which create the map adjusts the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] of the implement [10].);
and controlling, with the computing system [108], a penetration depth of a tillage tool [32, 34] of a tillage implement [10] based on the tillage prescription map (Page 6 section 0044 lines discloses that the controller [108] controls the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] based on the moisture content sensed which makes up the tillage prescription map.).
However, this combination does not disclose
receiving, with the computing system, data from the sensor that is indicative of a B-horizon present within the field as the agricultural harvester travels across the field;
identifying, with the computing system, the B- horizon within the field based on the received data;
and generating, with the computing system, a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on the identified the B- horizon.
LogicGeo discloses a ground penetrating radar sensor that senses can detect layers of gravel and bedrock (Page 9, Stratigraphic Imaging section, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute for Barrick’s soil moisture content sensor for LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor for sensing bedrock and gravel in order to identify different soil layers/characteristics and for further management of soil for agricultural purposes (Page 16, Additional GPR Applications and Experience section, lines 10 & 16).
The resultant combination discloses a method for generating tillage prescription maps using an agricultural harvester (Barrick’s section 0016 lines 10-16 discloses that the vehicle [12] may be an agricultural harvester or any suitable vehicle.), the agricultural harvester (Section 0016 lines 10-16 discloses that the vehicle [12] may be an agricultural harvester or any suitable vehicle.) including a frame (chassis) and a sensor supported on the frame (Page 2 section 0019 discloses that the sensor may be located anywhere on the agricultural harvester [12]), the method comprising:
controlling, with a computing system [108, Barrick], an operation of the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in Barrick, section 0016 lines 10-16) such that the agricultural harvester (Agricultural harvester [12] as disclosed in Barrick, section 0016 lines 10-16) travels across a field to perform a harvesting operation thereon;
receiving, with the computing system [108, Barrick], data from the sensor [as disclosed by LogicGeo] that is indicative of a B-horizon present within the field as the agricultural harvester travels across the field (Barrick’s page 4 section 0032 lines 1-10 and lines 25-28 disclose the harvester senses input from a sensor, which has been substituted for LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor);
identifying, with the computing system [108, Barrick], the B-horizon within the field based on the received data (from LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor);
generating, with the computing system [108, Barrick], a tillage prescription map for use during a subsequent tillage operation based on the identified the B-horizon (via LogicGeo’s sensor), the tillage prescription map prescribing a penetration depth for a tillage tool at a plurality of locations within the field (Barrick’s page 6 section 0042 lines 1-4 discloses the creation of a map based on filed location and the sensor input which has been substituted with LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar sensor input at various locations within the field.);
and controlling, with the computing system, a penetration depth of a tillage tool of a tillage implement based on the tillage prescription map (Barrick’s page 6 section 0044 lines discloses that the controller [108] controls the depth of the tillage tools [32, 34] based on the input from the sensor which has been replaced with LogicGeo’s ground penetrating radar which makes up the tillage prescription map.).
Regarding claim 18, Barrick and LogicGeo disclose the method of claim 17, wherein identifying the B-horizon comprises generating, with the computing system [108, Barrick], a representation of the soil within the field based on the data captured by the sensor (Barrick’s page 6 section 0042 discloses the creation of the map based on the filed location and sensor input at various depths within the field, the sensor input being the input from LogicGeo’s B-horizon sensor.).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Anderson (US 2022/0022362).
Regarding claim 8, Barrick and LogicGeo disclose the system of claim 7.
However, Barrick and LogicGeo do not disclose wherein the sensor comprises a ground- penetrating radar sensing device and an electromagnetic induction sensing device.
Anderson discloses a vehicle [20] wherein the sensor [22] comprises away to sense soil compaction using a ground-penetrating radar sensing device and an electromagnetic induction sensing device (Page 2 section 0018 lines 1-9 discloses the sensor can comprise a ground-penetrating radar sensor and an electromagnetic induction sensing device for the purpose of determining a prescription of tillage in an area of soil.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Anderson’s method of using an electromagnetic induction sensing device with a ground penetrating radar sensor to Barrick and LogicGeo’s combine with a sole radar ground penetrating sensor in order to gain more accurate soil readings as each sensing method has shortcomings (Page 2 section 0018 lines 11-13) therefore it would be obvious to use more than one.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr) and Anderson (US 2022/0022362) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of LaPrade (US10649079).
Regarding claim 9, Barrick, LogicGeo, and Anderson disclose the system of claim 8.
However, Barrick, LogicGeo, and Anderson do not disclose wherein the ground-penetrating radar sensing device corresponds to a first ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a first frequency, the sensor further comprising a second ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a second frequency, the second frequency differing from the first frequency.
LaPrade discloses a ground-penetrating radar sensing device [300] comprising a first ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a first frequency, the sensor further comprising a second ground-penetrating radar sensing device configured to operate at a second frequency, the second frequency differing from the first frequency (Column 6 lines 1-6 disclose that there may be more than one radar emitting pedal, each pedal being programmable to a different frequency. Column 14 lines 4-10 disclose that the second frequency emitted may be used to scan at a second deeper depth.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply LaPrade’s concept of operating two ground-penetrating radar sensing devices at two different frequencies to Anderson’s ground-penetrating radar sensing device in order to be able to test soil compaction at different depths.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed on 12/29/2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of Berggren (US 2019/0064795 A1) and Anderson (2022/0022362) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of Berggren (US 2019/0064795 A1), and LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr).
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed on 12/29/2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 6 and 17 under Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of Anderson (US 2022/0022362) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Barrick (US 2020/0236836) in view of LogicGeo (https://www.logicgeophysics.com/gpr).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 14, and 19 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stoller (WO 2017/049186) discloses an apparatus, system, and method for monitoring soil criteria during tillage operations and control of tillage tools. Nahuel-Andrejuk (US 2020/0255140) discloses methods for acquiring field condition data. Canyon (US 2020/0229361) discloses a method and system of determining soil-water properties.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ASHLEY A KAERCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-0128. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th (7-11 AM).
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, Joseph Rocca can be reached at 571-272-8971. 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.
/ASHLEY A KAERCHER/Examiner, Art Unit 3671 2/7/2026
/JOSEPH M ROCCA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671