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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Incoming IDS received 05-27-2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 14 have been amended.
There are no new claims.
Claims 2, 15, and 17 have been cancelled.
Claims 1, 3-14, 16, and 18-21 are currently pending.
The official correspondence below is a after non-final.
Examiner Note
The addition or removal of prior art is not meant to indicate that an amendment has overcome the prior art in any or all instances, but to remove redundant/ overlapping teachings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3-14, 16, and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lupu (US 20210153418 A1) in view of Kocer (US 20210357664 A1) in further view of Foster (US 20170354080 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 1, Lupu discloses, determining, by the farming machine (Lupu: [0003]; [0052]), a second farming operation (Lupu: [ABS]) comprising a second spray treatment (Lupu: [ABS] second ground-engaging tools) to treat individual plants in a field (Lupu: [0022]) after a first farming operation (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]) comprising a first spray treatment to treat individual plants (Lupu: [0044]), wherein the second farming operation is a different spray treatment than the first farming operation (Lupu: [0041]; [0044]); determining, by the farming machine (Lupu: [0052]), a current configuration of the farming machine is not capable of performing the second farming operation in the field (Lupu: [0017]; [0041]); wherein determining the current configuration is not capable of performing the second farming operation comprises: identifying components installed in the current configuration (Lupu: [0017] The controller may then be configured to adjust one or more operating parameters of the first ground-engaging tool(s) based on the determined first value(s) of the field characteristic(s). Such an adjustment(s) may impact the field characteristic(s) in a manner that requires further adjustment of the operation of the implement ... after adjusting the operating parameter(s) of the first ground-engaging tool(s), the controller may be configured to determine a second value(s) of the field characteristic(s) based on the received sensor data. Thereafter, the controller may be configured to adjust one or more operating parameters of the second ground-engaging tool(s) based on the determined second value(s) of the field characteristic(s)) are unable to perform the second farming operation in the field (Lupu: [0017] The controller may then be configured to adjust one or more operating parameters of the first ground-engaging tool(s) based on the determined first value(s) of the field characteristic(s). Such an adjustment(s) may impact the field characteristic(s) in a manner that requires further adjustment of the operation of the implement ... after adjusting the operating parameter(s) of the first ground-engaging tool(s), the controller may be configured to determine a second value(s) of the field characteristic(s) based on the received sensor data. Thereafter, the controller may be configured to adjust one or more operating parameters of the second ground-engaging tool(s) based on the determined second value(s) of the field characteristic(s)), responsive to the farming machine determining that the farming machine cannot perform the second farming operation (Lupu: [0046]), identifying, by the farming machine, a third farming operation comprising a third spray treatment to treat multiple plants in the field as the compensatory farming action (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]), wherein: the third farming operation is a different type of farming operation from the first farming operation and the second farming operation (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]), and the farming machine is capable of performing the third farming operation using the current configuration (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]); and responsive to identifying a compensatory farming operation to perform in place of the second farming operation, performing the compensatory farming operation (Lupu: [0046]).
Lupu does not explicitly recite the terminology “spray treatment”. However, Lupu discloses a first, second, third, and forth differing tasks for soil treatment (see at least [0041] and [0044]). Which, the examiner respectfully submits, under the broadest reasonable interpretation is a parallel teaching.
Lupu discloses a response to determining second operation is a no-go based upon sensor readings. Lupu does not explicitly disclose, sending, by the farming machine, a notification to a remote system that the farming machine in the current configuration cannot perform the second farming operation; and responsive to a passage of at least a threshold amount of time after sending the notification to the remote system without receiving corresponding instructions from the remote system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kocer discloses, sending, by the farming machine, a notification to a remote system (Kocer: [0127]) that the farming machine in the current configuration cannot perform the second farming operation (Kocer: [0124]); and responsive to a passage of at least a threshold amount of time after sending the notification to the remote system without receiving corresponding instructions from the remote system (Kocer: [0138]), for the benefit of prompting human intervention and initiating performance of a mission.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a method disclosed by Lupu to include prompting human intervention taught by Kocer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to prompting human intervention and initiating performance of a mission.
Lupu, as modified, does not explicitly disclose, storing, by the farming machine, a farming machine configuration list, comparing the current configuration to the farming machine configuration list, and identifying a configuration of components for performing the second farming operation from the farming machine configuration list; and identifying the components from the farming machine configuration list are capable of performing the third farming operation.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Foster discloses, storing, by the farming machine, a farming machine configuration list (Foster: [ABS] The data fields comprise a user-given name and at least one of a compatible implement, an accessory, or a task for which the agricultural equipment may be configured; [0052] The tasks field 720 may include a list of tasks for which the piece of equipment is configured or may be configured; [0018] one or more user-editable data fields for the pieces of equipment, including given names (e.g., “utility magnum” and “planting magnum”), add-ons and accessory packages, possible tasks, compatible equipment, etc. to better manage the fleet of equipment; [0019] equipment configuration code files may be default configuration code files, containing equipment names, the dimensions (e.g., length, width, height, etc.) of the piece of equipment, characteristics of the piece of equipment (e.g., minimum turning radius, fuel efficiency, compatibility with other pieces of equipment), operating constraints (e.g., maximum speed, etc.), default settings, add-on kits, accessories, and other pieces of information about the equipment; [0021] The operator may use the command and control system software to give pieces of equipment names, track added add-on packages or accessories, and manage compatibility with other pieces of equipment. As shown in FIG. 1, the command and control system may be used to coordinate multiple agricultural tasks performed by multiple tractor 22/implement 24 combinations on the same field 28; [0032] The operator interface 204 may receive inputs from the operator 100 and/or display information for the operator 100. The control system may control one or more actuators or other systems within the piece of equipment 22, 24, based inputs from the operator, outputs from one or more sensors within the piece of equipment 22, 24, the equipment configuration code file 200, and the like), comparing the current configuration to the farming machine configuration list (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]; [0018]; [0019]; [0021]; [0032]), and identifying a configuration of components for performing the second farming operation from the farming machine configuration list (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]; [0018]; [0019]; [0021]; [0032]); and identifying the components from the farming machine configuration list are capable of performing the third farming operation (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]; [0018]; [0019]; [0021]; [0032]), for the benefit of determining possible tasks, compatible equipment, and to better manage the fleet of equipment.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a method disclosed by a modified Lupu to include lists taught by Foster. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to determining possible tasks, compatible equipment, and to better manage the fleet of equipment.
REGARDING CLAIM 3, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Lupu, as modified, also discloses, determining whether a current configuration of the farming machine is capable of performing the second farming operation in the field further comprises: determining, by the farming machine, that performance of the second farming operation in the field uses a component not present on the farming machine (Foster: [0052-0053]).
REGARDING CLAIM 4, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 3, and further, Kocer also discloses, performing the compensatory farming operation comprises: returning, by the farming machine, to a designated location; modifying the farming machine to include the component necessary for the farming machine to perform the second farming operation; and performing, with the farming machine including the necessary component, the second farming operation as the compensatory farming operation (Kocer: [0124-0127]).
REGARDING CLAIM 5, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Lupu also discloses, receiving, by the farming machine, from the remote system, additional instructions to initiate a third farming operation that is a different type of farming operation from the first farming operation and the second farming operation in the field; verifying, by the farming machine, that the farming machine is capable of performing the third farming operation in the field; and identifying, by the farming machine, the third farming operation as the compensatory farming operation (Lupu: [0044]).
REGARDING CLAIM 6, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 5, and further, Lupu also discloses, performing, by the farming machine, the compensatory farming operation in the field comprises: adjusting, by the farming machine, one or more components of the farming machine to enable performing the third farming operation as the compensatory farming operation (Lupu: [0044]).
REGARDING CLAIM 7, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Lupu, as modified, also discloses, determining, by the farming machine, the second farming operation to perform in the field after the first farming operation comprises accessing a treatment plan comprising a plurality of farming operations for the farming machine to perform (Foster: [0021]; [0033]; [0052]).
REGARDING CLAIM 8, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Lupu also discloses, determining, by the farming machine, the second farming operation to perform in the field after the first farming operation comprises determining a treatment for the field (Lupu: [0044]), and wherein determining the treatment for the field comprises analyzing measurements obtained from one or more sensors coupled to the farming machine (Lupu: [0017]).
REGARDING CLAIM 9, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Lupu, as modified, also discloses, by the farming machine, whether a current configuration of the farming machine is capable of performing the second farming operation in the field comprises: accessing a component list of the farming machine; and comparing the component list of the farming machine to a list of components necessary for performing the second farming operation (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]).
REGARDING CLAIM 10, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Lupu, as modified, also discloses, determining, by the farming machine, whether the current configuration of the farming machine is capable of performing the second farming operation in the field comprises: accessing a list of components for performing the farming operation; and determining, using sensor measurements from components of the list of components that represent an operational status of the components, whether components of the farming machine that are in the list of components for performing the farming operation have operational failures that prevent normal operation (Foster: [0018-0019]; [0021]; [0032]).
REGARDING CLAIM 11, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Kocer also discloses, the notification that the farming machine cannot perform the second farming operation in the field comprises an indication of the current configuration of the farming machine (Kocer: [0124]; [0127]; [0188]).
REGARDING CLAIM 12, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Lupu also discloses, determining, by the farming machine, the second farming operation to perform in the field after the first farming operation comprises receiving the second farming operation from the remote system (Lupu: [0041]).
REGARDING CLAIM 13, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Kocer also discloses, the farming machine ceases operation until it receives additional instructions to perform the compensatory farming operation from the remote system (Kocer: [0124-0127]).
REGARDING CLAIM 14, Lupu discloses, a computer processor; and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer program instructions executable by the computer processor to perform steps of a farming machine in a field to verify a change in farming operation (Lupu: [0032]), the steps comprising: determining, by the farming machine (Lupu: [0003]; [0052]), a second farming operation (Lupu: [ABS]) comprising a second spray treatment (Lupu: [ABS]) to treat individual plants in a field (Lupu: [0022]) after a first farming operation (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]) comprising a first spray treatment to treat individual plants (Lupu: [0044]), wherein the second farming operation is a different spray treatment than the first farming operation (Lupu: [0041]; [0044]); determining, by the farming machine (Lupu: [0052]), a current configuration of the farming machine is not capable of performing the second farming operation in the field (Lupu: [0017]; [0041]); wherein determining the current configuration is not capable of performing the second farming operation comprises: identifying components installed in the current configuration (Lupu: [0017]) are unable to perform the second farming operation in the field (Lupu: [0017]), responsive to the farming machine determining that the farming machine cannot perform the second farming operation (Lupu: [0046]), identifying, by the farming machine, a third farming operation comprising a third spray treatment to treat multiple plants in the field as the compensatory farming action (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]), wherein: the third farming operation is a different type of farming operation from the first farming operation and the second farming operation (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]), and the farming machine is capable of performing the third farming operation using the current configuration (Lupu: [0040]; [0046-0047]); and responsive to identifying a compensatory farming operation to perform in place of the second farming operation, performing the compensatory farming operation (Lupu: [0046]).
Lupu does not explicitly recite the terminology “spray treatment”. However, Lupu discloses a first, second, third, and forth differing tasks for soil treatment (see at least [0041] and [0044]). Which, the examiner respectfully submits, under the broadest reasonable interpretation is a parallel teaching.
Lupu discloses a response to determining second operation is a no-go based upon sensor readings. Lupu does not explicitly disclose, sending, by the farming machine, a notification to a remote system that the farming machine in the current configuration cannot perform the second farming operation; and responsive to a passage of at least a threshold amount of time after sending the notification to the remote system without receiving corresponding instructions from the remote system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kocer discloses, sending, by the farming machine, a notification to a remote system (Kocer: [0127]) that the farming machine in the current configuration cannot perform the second farming operation (Kocer: [0124]); and responsive to a passage of at least a threshold amount of time after sending the notification to the remote system without receiving corresponding instructions from the remote system (Kocer: [0138]), for the benefit of prompting human intervention and initiating performance of a mission.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a method disclosed by Lupu to include prompting human intervention taught by Kocer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to prompting human intervention and initiating performance of a mission.
Lupu, as modified, does not explicitly disclose, storing, by the farming machine, a farming machine configuration list, comparing the current configuration to the farming machine configuration list, and identifying a configuration of components for performing the second farming operation from the farming machine configuration list; and identifying the components from the farming machine configuration list are capable of performing the third farming operation.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Foster discloses, storing, by the farming machine, a farming machine configuration list (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]; [0019]; [0021]; [0032]), comparing the current configuration to the farming machine configuration list (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]; [0018]; [0019]; [0021]; [0032]), and identifying a configuration of components for performing the second farming operation from the farming machine configuration list (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]; [0018]; [0019]; [0021]; [0032]); and identifying the components from the farming machine configuration list are capable of performing the third farming operation (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]; [0018]; [0019]; [0021]; [0032]), for the benefit of determining possible tasks, compatible equipment, and to better manage the fleet of equipment.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a method disclosed by a modified Lupu to include lists taught by Foster. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to determining possible tasks, compatible equipment, and to better manage the fleet of equipment.
REGARDING CLAIM 16, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 14, and further, Lupu also discloses, receiving, by the farming machine, from the remote system, additional instructions to initiate a third farming operation that is a different type of farming operation from the first farming operation and the second farming operation in the field; verifying, by the farming machine, that the farming machine is capable of performing the third farming operation in the field; and identifying, by the farming machine, the third farming operation as the compensatory farming operation (Lupu: [0044]).
REGARDING CLAIM 18, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 14, and further, Lupu also discloses, identifying the compensatory farming operation further comprises: identifying, by the farming machine, a scheduled third farming operation that the farming machine is capable of performing using the current configuration as the compensatory farming operation, and wherein the scheduled third farming operation is performed as the compensatory farming operation (Lupu: [0044]).
REGARDING CLAIM 19, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 14, and further, Lupu, as modified, also discloses, determining, by the farming machine, whether a current configuration of the farming machine is capable of performing the second farming operation in the field comprises: accessing a component list of the farming machine; and comparing the component list of the farming machine to a list of components necessary for performing the second farming operation (Foster: [ABS]; [0052]).
REGARDING CLAIM 21, Lupu, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1, and further, Lupu also discloses, identifying the compensatory farming operation further comprises: identifying, by the farming machine, a scheduled third farming operation that the farming machine is capable of performing using the current configuration as the compensatory farming operation, and wherein the scheduled third farming operation is performed as the compensatory farming operation (Lupu: [0044]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of the independent claims 1 and 14 under 35 USC §103, obviousness, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the reference combination applied in the prior rejection of record for matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Rupp (US 20160071410 A1)
Sarzen (US 20210289755 A1)
Matsuzaki (US 20180025560 A1)
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 AARRON SANTOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5288. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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, ANGELA ORTIZ can be reached at (571) 272-1206. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights