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 .
Status of claims
The following claims have been rejected or allowed for the following reasons:
Claims 1-20 is rejected under 35 USC § 103
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 7/29/2022 and 12/19/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Missotten (US 6192664 B1), in further view of Bischoff (US 11109535 B2).
Regarding claim 1 Missotten teaches n agricultural system that determines of a harvester, the agricultural system comprising: a frame; (Missotten column 3 lines 26 – 41 read “As illustrated in FIG. 1, a combine harvester, generally indicated at 1, comprises a main chassis or frame”);
a material transfer device that directs a flow of harvested materials through the header, the material transfer device being supported relative to the frame; (Missotten column 3 lines 26 – 41 read “The threshing and separating mechanism 11 and the cleaning mechanism 12 together constitute crop processing means. A grain header 14 and straw elevator 15 extend forwardly of the main frame 2 and are pivotally secured thereto”);
the sensor generates data indicative of an amount of harvested materials being directed through the header; (Missotten claim 10 reads “An agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 9, wherein said rotative auger is an intake auger of a header and said flow rate sensor means is operable to measure the mass flow rate of the crop material collected by said header.”);
and a computing system communicatively coupled to the sensor, the computing system receives determines (Missotten column 5 lines 58 – 67 read “The combine harvester 1 is equipped with an on-board computer 98, which receives data from various sensors on the harvester 1.” And column 2 lines 10 – 28 read “Such sensor generates a signal which is characteristic for the mass flow rate of the material transported by the conveyor.”);
Missotten does not teach a sensor having a field of view directed toward the flow of harvested materials through the header.
Bischoff in analogous art, teaches a sensor having a field of view directed toward the flow of harvested materials through the header, (Bischoff [0009] reads “The sensor for detecting the throughput may operate electro-optically (for example, with a (monocular or stereo) camera operating two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally and an image processing system or a laser scanner) and may be designed to detect the standing crop upstream of the harvesting attachment or (when the field has been previously traveled over) adjacent to the combine harvester. … In a further embodiment, the sensor may detect the throughput in the case of a harvesting process which has already taken place earlier”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combine the teaching of Missotten with that of Bischoff to provide an improved system for evening the supply of crop in a combine harvester. (Bischoff column 2 lines 1 – 15 reads “In particular, in the case of a lower stop of the lower deflection roller being set too high, operating situations are conceivable in which a large amount of slippage occurs, which leads to an uneven supply of harvested crops to the threshing device and which has a negative effect on the performance of the combine harvester.”);
Regarding claim 2 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1, wherein the sensor is coupled to the frame. (Missotten abstract reads “The harvesting machine is equipped with a sensor for sensing the flow rate of at least a portion of the collected crop.”);
Regarding claim 7 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1, wherein the sensor is configured to generates the data indicative of the amount of harvested materials being directed through the header (Missotten claim 10 reads “An agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 9, wherein said rotative auger is an intake auger of a header and said flow rate sensor means is operable to measure the mass flow rate of the crop material collected by said header.”);
within the field of view, and wherein the sensor comprises at least one of a camera, a radar sensor, or a lidar sensor. (Bischoff [0009] reads “The sensor for detecting the throughput may operate electro-optically (for example, with a (monocular or stereo) camera operating two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally and an image processing system or a laser scanner) and may be designed to detect the standing crop upstream of the harvesting attachment or (when the field has been previously traveled over) adjacent to the combine harvester. … In a further embodiment, the sensor may detect the throughput in the case of a harvesting process which has already taken place earlier”);
Regarding claim 8 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1, wherein the computing system adjusts (Missotten claim 10 reads “An agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 9, wherein said rotative auger is an intake auger of a header and said flow rate sensor means is operable to measure the mass flow rate of the crop material collected by said header” and claims 14 and 15 read “14. A method for automatically adjusting the travel speed of an agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 12, using the data generated by said crop flow rate sensor means. 15. A method for automatically adjusting the settings of crop processing means of an agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 12, using the data generated by said crop flow rate sensor means.”);
Regarding claim 11 Missotten teaches An agricultural method [[for]]of determining the throughput of a header of a harvester, (Missotten column 3 lines 26 – 41 read “As illustrated in FIG. 1, a combine harvester, generally indicated at 1, comprises a main chassis or frame”);
(Missotten column 3 lines 26 – 41 read “The threshing and separating mechanism 11 and the cleaning mechanism 12 together constitute crop processing means. A grain header 14 and straw elevator 15 extend forwardly of the main frame 2 and are pivotally secured thereto”);
the method comprising: operating [[the]] material transfer device of the header such that a flow of harvested materials is directed through the header; (Missotten claim 10 reads “An agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 9, wherein said rotative auger is an intake auger of a header and said flow rate sensor means is operable to measure the mass flow rate of the crop material collected by said header.”);
the data being indicative of an amount of harvested materials being directed through the header by the material transfer device, the material transfer device being supported relative to a frame of the header; and determining, with the computing system, a header throughput based at least in part on the data. (Missotten column 5 lines 58 – 67 read “The combine harvester 1 is equipped with an on-board computer 98, which receives data from various sensors on the harvester 1.” And column 2 lines 10 – 28 read “Such sensor generates a signal which is characteristic for the mass flow rate of the material transported by the conveyor.”);
Missotten does not teach receiving, with a computing system, data generated by a sensor having a field of view directed toward the flow of harvested materials through the header, (Bischoff [0009] reads “The sensor for detecting the throughput may operate electro-optically (for example, with a (monocular or stereo) camera operating two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally and an image processing system or a laser scanner) and may be designed to detect the standing crop upstream of the harvesting attachment or (when the field has been previously traveled over) adjacent to the combine harvester. … In a further embodiment, the sensor may detect the throughput in the case of a harvesting process which has already taken place earlier”);
Bischoff in analogous art, teaches receiving, with a computing system, data generated by a sensor having a field of view directed toward the flow of harvested materials through the header, (Bischoff [0009] reads “The sensor for detecting the throughput may operate electro-optically (for example, with a (monocular or stereo) camera operating two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally and an image processing system or a laser scanner) and may be designed to detect the standing crop upstream of the harvesting attachment or (when the field has been previously traveled over) adjacent to the combine harvester. … In a further embodiment, the sensor may detect the throughput in the case of a harvesting process which has already taken place earlier”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combine the teaching of Missotten with that of Bischoff to provide an improved system for evening the supply of crop in a combine harvester. (Bischoff column 2 lines 1 – 15 reads “In particular, in the case of a lower stop of the lower deflection roller being set too high, operating situations are conceivable in which a large amount of slippage occurs, which leads to an uneven supply of harvested crops to the threshing device and which has a negative effect on the performance of the combine harvester.”);
Regarding claim 12 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11, further comprising adjusting an operation of the harvester based at least in part on the header throughput. (Missotten column 2 lines 49 – 52 read “The signal provided by the crop flow rate sensor means may also be used for adjusting the travel speed or the settings of the crop processing means, in order to keep the harvester operating at optimum efficiency.”);
Regarding claim 14 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11, further comprising generating a yield map based at least in part on the header throughput. (Missotten column 2 lines 41 – 48 read “An agricultural harvester equipped with a flow rate sensor means as described above and which further comprises means for establishing the position of said harvester in a field, means for sensing the speed of said harvester and means for logging the data generated by said position establishing means, said speed sensing means and said crop flow rate sensor means, can be used for establishing yield maps for a field.”);
Regarding claim 19 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11, wherein the sensor is generates the data indicative of the amount of harvested materials being directed through the header (Missotten claim 10 reads “An agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 9, wherein said rotative auger is an intake auger of a header and said flow rate sensor means is operable to measure the mass flow rate of the crop material collected by said header.”);
within the field of view [[,]]. and wherein the sensor comprises at least one of a camera, a radar sensor, or a lidar sensor. (Bischoff [0009] reads “The sensor for detecting the throughput may operate electro-optically (for example, with a (monocular or stereo) camera operating two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally and an image processing system or a laser scanner) and may be designed to detect the standing crop upstream of the harvesting attachment or (when the field has been previously traveled over) adjacent to the combine harvester. … In a further embodiment, the sensor may detect the throughput in the case of a harvesting process which has already taken place earlier”);
Claim(s) 3 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Missotten/Bischoff; in further view of Weyrich (NPL A Real-time and Vision-based Methodology for Processing 3D Objects on a Conveyor Belt).
Regarding claim 3 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1.
wherein the frame defines a chamber within which the material transfer device is disposed, (Bischoff column 4 lines 57-64 reads “The different devices for threshing, conveying, cleaning and separating are located inside the load-bearing undercarriage 12.”);
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach the field of view being directed aft of the material transfer device within the chamber relative to a direction of travel of the harvester.
Weyrich in analogous art teaches the field of view being directed aft of the material transfer device within the chamber relative to a direction of travel of the harvester (Weyrich in figure 3-7 from page 4 depicts the usage of multiple cameras on a material transfer device, some of which would be pointed towards the aft of the harvester.);
PNG
media_image1.png
462
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined Missotten/Bischoff with the teaching of Weyrich to provide an improved industrial 3D vision system. (Weyrich abstract reads “The objective of this paper is to present an industrial vision-based methodology for processing 3D objects being conveyed by a constant velocity.);
Regarding claim 15 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11.
wherein the frame defines a chamber within which the material transfer device is disposed, (Bischoff column 4 lines 57-64 reads “The different devices for threshing, conveying, cleaning and separating are located inside the load-bearing undercarriage 12.”);
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach the field of view being directed aft of the material transfer device within the chamber relative to a direction of travel of the harvester.
Weyrich in analogous art teaches the field of view being directed aft of the material transfer device within the chamber relative to a direction of travel of the harvester (Weyrich in figure 3-7 from page 4 depicts the usage of multiple cameras on a material transfer device, some of which would be pointed towards the aft of the harvester.);
PNG
media_image1.png
462
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined Missotten/Bischoff with the teaching of Weyrich to provide an improved industrial 3D vision system. (Weyrich abstract reads “The objective of this paper is to present an industrial vision-based methodology for processing 3D objects being conveyed by a constant velocity.);
Claim(s) 4-6 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Missotten/Bischoff in further view LASE (NPL LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor).
Regarding claim 4 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1.
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach wherein the field of view is directed downward from vertically above the material transfer device.
Lase in analogous art teaches wherein the field of view is directed downward from vertically above the material transfer device. (Lase in figure 1 from page 1, below depicts the field of view from a scanner directed downwardly onto a material transfer device);
PNG
media_image2.png
215
685
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Missotten with that of lase to provide measurement of the material on a material transfer device. (Lase Page 1 Paragraph 1 reads “The LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor application is a high-precision two-dimensional laser measuring system that has been specially developed for measuring materials on conveyor belt systems.”);
Regarding claim 5 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1.
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach wherein the material transfer device extends along a lateral width defined between a first lateral end and a second lateral end, the field of view extending across at least a portion of the lateral width of the material transfer device.
Lase in analogous art teaches wherein the material transfer device extends along a lateral width defined between a first lateral end and a second lateral end, the field of view extending across at least a portion of the lateral width of the material transfer device. (Lase in figure 1 from page 1, below depicts the field of view from a scanner directed downwardly onto a material transfer device and across the whole width of the material transfer device);
PNG
media_image2.png
215
685
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Missotten/Bischoff with that of lase to provide measurement of the material on a material transfer device. (Lase Page 1 Paragraph 1 reads “The LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor application is a high-precision two-dimensional laser measuring system that has been specially developed for measuring materials on conveyor belt systems.”);
Regarding claim 6 Missotten/Bischoff teaches wherein the computing system is further adjusts
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach The agricultural system of claim 5, wherein the computing system is determines
Lase in analogous art teaches wherein the computing system is determines a distribution of the flow of harvested materials across at least the portion of the lateral width of the material transfer device (Lase page 1 paragraph 2 reads “From the scan data obtained, the volume flow can now be precisely calculated using the LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor application software”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Missotten/Bischoff with that of lase to provide measurement of the material on a material transfer device. (Lase Page 1 Paragraph 1 reads “The LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor application is a high-precision two-dimensional laser measuring system that has been specially developed for measuring materials on conveyor belt systems.”);
Regarding claim 16 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11.
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach wherein the field of view is directed downward from vertically above the material transfer device.
Lase in analogous art teaches wherein the field of view is directed downward from vertically above the material transfer device. (Lase in figure 1 from page 1, below depicts the field of view from a scanner directed downwardly onto a material transfer device);
PNG
media_image2.png
215
685
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Missotten/Bischoff with that of lase to provide measurement of the material on a material transfer device. (Lase Page 1 Paragraph 1 reads “The LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor application is a high-precision two-dimensional laser measuring system that has been specially developed for measuring materials on conveyor belt systems.”);
Regarding claim 17 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11.
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach wherein the field of view extends across at least a portion of a lateral width of the material transfer device, the lateral width of the material transfer device being defined between a first lateral end and a second lateral end, . (Lase in figure 1 from page 1, below depicts the field of view from a scanner directed downwardly onto a material transfer device and across the width of a material transfer device);
PNG
media_image2.png
215
685
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1
the method further comprising determining, with the computing system, a distribution of the flow of harvested materials across at least the portion of the lateral width of the material transfer device. (Lase page 1 paragraph 2 reads “From the scan data obtained, the volume flow can now be precisely calculated using the LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor application software”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Missotten/Bischoff with that of lase to provide measurement of the material on a material transfer device. (Lase Page 1 Paragraph 1 reads “The LaseBVC - Bulk Volume Conveyor application is a high-precision two-dimensional laser measuring system that has been specially developed for measuring materials on conveyor belt systems.”);
Regarding claim 18 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 17, further comprising adjusting an operation of the harvester based at least in part on the distribution of the flow of harvested materials. (Missotten claim 10 reads “An agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 9, wherein said rotative auger is an intake auger of a header and said flow rate sensor means is operable to measure the mass flow rate of the crop material collected by said header” and claims 14 and 15 read “14. A method for automatically adjusting the travel speed of an agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 12, using the data generated by said crop flow rate sensor means. 15. A method for automatically adjusting the settings of crop processing means of an agricultural harvesting machine according to claim 12, using the data generated by said crop flow rate sensor means.”);
Claim(s) 10, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Missotten/Bischoff in further view Hunt (US 20220132740 A1).
Regarding claim 10 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1.
Missotten does not teach wherein the computing system [[is]]comprises a header computing system, the header computing system controlsan operation of the header, the header computing system being in communication with a main computing system of the harvester.
Hunt in analogous art teaches wherein the computing system [[is]]comprises a header computing system, the header computing system controls(Hunt [0043] reads “For instance, the header 110 may have a dedicated header controller which controls specific header-related functions, and the controller 310 may either be in the form of the dedicated header controller or be incorporated as part of the dedicated header controller.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Missotten/Bischoff with the teachings of Hunt to provide greater automatic control of harvesting equipment. (Hunt [0004] reads “Within the industry, there is an ever-increasing demand for systems designed to automatically control the operation of components associated with agricultural vehicles, including components associated with headers of agricultural harvesters.”);
Regarding claim 20 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11.
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach wherein the computing system [[is]]comprises a header computing system, the header computing system controls an operation of the header, the header computing system being in communication with a main computing system of the harvester.
Hunt in analogous art teaches wherein the computing system, the header computing system controls (Hunt [0043] reads “For instance, the header 110 may have a dedicated header controller which controls specific header-related functions, and the controller 310 may either be in the form of the dedicated header controller or be incorporated as part of the dedicated header controller.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Missotten/Bischoff with the teachings of Hunt to provide greater automatic control of harvesting equipment. (Hunt [0004] reads “Within the industry, there is an ever-increasing demand for systems designed to automatically control the operation of components associated with agricultural vehicles, including components associated with headers of agricultural harvesters.”);
Claim(s) 9, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Missotten/Bischoff in further view Beavers (US 10820502 B2).
Regarding claim 9 Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural system of claim 1.
Missotten/Bischoff does not teach wherein the computing system controls an operation of a user interface associated with the harvester based at least in part on the header throughput.
Beavers in analogous art teaches wherein the computing system controls header throughput. (Beavers column 5 lines 61- 67 read “An example of interface 311 is shown in FIG. 4 where various parameters and data are displayed to the operator through a graphical user interface (GUI) 400.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Missotten/Bischoff with the teachings of Beavers to provide a method of controlling a harvester while taking into account outside conditions. (Beavers column 1 lines 23-50 read “The method comprising determining, by the controller, a heading of the combine, determining, by the controller, wind effects on the expelled residue based on an observation of the expelled residue at the determined heading, and adjusting, by the controller, at least one of the speed of the residue spreader wheel or the angle of the residue deflector based on the wind effects to achieve a desired residue spread at the determined heading.”);
Regarding claim 13, Missotten/Bischoff teaches The agricultural method of claim 11.
Missotten does not teach further comprising controlling an operation of a user interface to indicate the header throughput.
Beavers in analogous art, teaches further comprising controlling an operation of a user interface to indicate the header throughput. (Beavers column 5 lines 61- 67 read “An example of interface 311 is shown in FIG. 4 where various parameters and data are displayed to the operator through a graphical user interface (GUI) 400.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Missotten/Bischoff with the teachings of Beavers to provide a method of controlling a harvester while taking into account outside conditions. (Beavers column 1 lines 23-50 read “The method comprising determining, by the controller, a heading of the combine, determining, by the controller, wind effects on the expelled residue based on an observation of the expelled residue at the determined heading, and adjusting, by the controller, at least one of the speed of the residue spreader wheel or the angle of the residue deflector based on the wind effects to achieve a desired residue spread at the determined heading.”);
Other references not Cited
Throughout examination other references were found that could read onto the prior art. Though these references were not used in this examination they could be used in future examination and could read on the contents of the current disclosure. These references are, Beck (US 6584390 B2) and Kruse (US 4487002 A).
Response to arguments
Applicant argues < It is respectfully submitted Missotten in view of Bischoff does not make 6 Serial Number: 17/877,185 Office Action Dated: October 22, 2025 Response Dated: December 23, 2025 ATTORNEY DOCKET NUMBER: 60412/CNHI-213 obvious at least "a sensor having a field of view directed toward the flow of harvested materials through the header, the sensor generates data indicative of an amount of harvested materials being directed through the header," as currently recited in claim 1.> [page 7 spanning paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Firstly, the current rejection teaches this limitation in two parts. Missotten is viewed in light of generating a signal that relates to the flow of material through the conveyor, which subsequently had to go through the header, while Biscoff is used to incorporate that this sensor would be an optical sensor that could view this flow. Furthermore, through it not taught in this manner in this rejection Biscoff does teach the full limitation as currently written. (Bischoff [0009] reads “The sensor for detecting the throughput may operate electro-optically (for example, with a (monocular or stereo) camera operating two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally and an image processing system or a laser scanner) and may be designed to detect the standing crop upstream of the harvesting attachment or (when the field has been previously traveled over) adjacent to the combine harvester.” And [0010] reads “Alternatively or additionally, the sensor is designed to detect the throughput of the harvesting attachment.”); Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Applicant argues < Nowhere does Bischoff particularly teach a sensor having a field of view directed toward the flow of harvested materials, let alone toward the flow of harvested materials through the header.> [page 9 3rd paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The specifications of Bischoff are written in a manner that does teach that either sensor type could be used to teach the flow of materials through the harvester. (Bischoff [0009] reads “The sensor for detecting the throughput may operate electro-optically (for example, with a (monocular or stereo) camera operating two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally and an image processing system or a laser scanner) and may be designed to detect the standing crop upstream of the harvesting attachment or (when the field has been previously traveled over) adjacent to the combine harvester.” And [0010] reads “Alternatively or additionally, the sensor is designed to detect the throughput of the harvesting attachment.”); Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Applicant argues <First, it is again respectfully submitted that Weyrich is not analogous art. Particularly, Weyrich is specifically directed to improvements in "vision-based automated inspection" for "industrial quality control.> [page 10 4th paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Weyrich can be considered analogous art because if fits both criteria. First, Weyrich is in the same field of invention because it deals with sensor systems for the processing of food products. (Weyrich abstract reads “In food industry this methodology is competent to reduce wastes.”); Furthermore Weyrich works to solve a similar problem of increasing throughput of a food processing system. (Weyrich Introduction reads “Throughput is particularly important for the food processing industry. In order to achieve that the products consistently meet specified quality standards the quality control should be automated.”); Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Applicant argues <Even so, it is respectfully submitted that Weyrich does not suggest a field of view being directed aft of the material transfer device within the chamber relative to a direction of travel of the harvester> [Page 11 first paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Weyrich does depict multiple cameras pointed in multiple directions which allows the system to maintain a better field of view of the objects passing over the conveyer. Even tough there could be additional camera that are not directed aft of the conveyer, there is still at least one device that is pointed aft of the conveyor. Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6228. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 am - 5 pm.
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 to reach examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramon Mercado can be reached at (571) 270 - 5744. 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.
/JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/Ramon A. Mercado/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3658