Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/017,601

HARVESTING SYSTEM BASED ON A PLATFORM FOR AGRICULTURAL HARVESTERS, AND PLATFORM FOR AGRICULTURAL HARVESTERS

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Jan 23, 2023
Examiner
RUNCO, MADELINE IVY
Art Unit
3671
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Cnh Industrial Brasil Ltda
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
194 granted / 251 resolved
+25.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
278
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.1%
+3.1% vs TC avg
§102
32.0%
-8.0% vs TC avg
§112
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 251 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 4-7, 16-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 4 recites the limitation "a valve" in line 3. However, it is not clear if this is the same component as “a flow control valve” set forth in claim 1 line 10. Specifically, it is unclear if these components are one and the same, or two different valves altogether. Claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons used to reject claim 1. Claims 5-7 and 17 are rejected as they depend upon claims 4 and 16. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Karst (US 20200305348 A1). Regarding claim 1, Karst discloses a header-based harvesting system for agricultural harvesters, the system comprising: a header removably coupled to a front end of a harvester, the header comprising a header frame (274) and a base cutter assembly (252) coupled to the header frame in a floating arrangement; an actuator (184/268) coupled between the header frame and the base cutter assembly; and a hydraulic circuit (191, see fig. 10) in fluid communication with the actuator, wherein the hydraulic circuit allows pressurized hydraulic fluid to be supplied to the actuator that regulates the floating movement of the base cutter assembly relative to the header frame, the hydraulic circuit including a flow control valve (212, 216) that regulates a flow of the hydraulic fluid supplied to and expelled from the actuator (paragraphs 0061-62). Regarding claim 4, Karst discloses the header-based harvesting system of claim 1, further comprising: a valve (202) that controls the supply of pressurized hydraulic fluid to at least one actuator line of the hydraulic circuit extending between the valve and the actuator; a pressure accumulator (190) fluidly coupled to the at least one actuator line downstream of the valve; and wherein the pressure accumulator (190) is configured to maintain maintains a substantially constant fluid pressure within the at least one actuator line (paragraph 0040). Regarding claim 5, Karst discloses the header-based harvesting system of claim 4, wherein the valve comprises a pressure regulating valve (202) that supplies the pressurized hydraulic fluid to the at least one actuator line at the substantially constant pressure. Regarding claim 6, Karst discloses the header-based harvesting system of claim 5, wherein: the pressure regulating valve comprises an electronically-controllable pressure regulating valve (202); the header-based harvesting system further comprises a controller (204) communicatively coupled to the pressure regulating valve; and the controller controls an operation of the pressure regulating valve based on a predetermined setting selected for the pressure regulating valve (paragraphs 0053-58). Regarding claim 7, Karst discloses the header-based harvesting system of claim 6, wherein the predetermined setting comprises an operator-selected setting associated with a desired downforce to be applied through the base cutter assembly (paragraph 0053). 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, 11, 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palmute (US 9801336 B2) in view of Karst (US 20200305348 A1). Regarding claim 1, Palmute discloses a header-based harvesting system for agricultural harvesters, the system comprising: a header (see fig. 1) removably coupled to a front end of a harvester (a sugar cane harvester), the header comprising a header frame (col. 2 lines 10-11) and a base cutter assembly (base-cutter assembly 16) coupled to the header frame in a floating arrangement (col. 3 lines 32-45); an actuator (hydraulic/pneumatic cylinder 4) coupled between the header frame and the base cutter assembly. Palmute does not disclose a hydraulic circuit in fluid communication with the actuator, wherein the hydraulic circuit allows pressurized hydraulic fluid to be supplied to the actuator that regulates the floating movement of the base cutter assembly relative to the header frame, the hydraulic circuit including a flow control valve that regulates a flow of the hydraulic fluid supplied to and expelled from the actuator. In the same field of endeavor, Karst discloses a header that floats and follows the contours of the ground having an actuator (184/268) coupled between the header frame (274) and a cutting assembly (264), and a hydraulic circuit (see fig. 10) in fluid communication with the actuator, wherein the hydraulic circuit allows pressurized hydraulic fluid to be supplied to the actuator that regulates the floating movement of the base cutter assembly relative to the header frame, the hydraulic circuit including a flow control valve (214, 216) that regulates a flow of the hydraulic fluid supplied to and expelled from the actuator (paragraphs 0061-62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the header arrangement of Palmute with the hydraulic circuit Karst as an alternative way of ensuring the cutter floats over the ground during harvesting. Regarding claim 11, Palmute, of the resultant combination, discloses the header-based harvesting system of claim 1, wherein the base cutter assembly (16) is coupled to header frame of the header via a pantographic arrangement (2, 5, 6, 17). Regarding claim 12, Palmute discloses a header for agricultural harvesters, the header comprising: a header frame (col. 2 lines 10-11) removably coupled to a front end of an agricultural harvester (a sugar cane harvester); a base cutter assembly (base-cutter assembly 16) coupled to the header frame, the base cutter assembly comprising at least one cutting blade and a drive assembly that rotationally drives the at least one cutting blade; a linkage assembly (2, 5, 6, 17) coupling the base cutter assembly to the header frame in which the base cutter assembly is movable relative to the header frame in both a first direction and a second direction opposite the first direction (see fig. 1-2, 16 moves up and down); an actuator (hydraulic/pneumatic cylinder 4) coupled between the header frame and the base cutter assembly, the actuator allowing the base cutter assembly to float relative to the header frame in both the first direction and the second direction (col. 3 lines 32-45). Palmute does not disclose a hydraulic circuit in fluid communication with the actuator, wherein the hydraulic circuit allows pressurized hydraulic fluid to be supplied to the actuator that regulates the floating movement of the base cutter assembly relative to the header frame, the hydraulic circuit including a flow control valve that regulates a flow of the hydraulic fluid supplied to and expelled from the actuator. In the same field of endeavor, Karst discloses a header that floats and follows the contours of the ground having an actuator (184/268) coupled between the header frame (274) and a cutting assembly (264), and a hydraulic circuit (see fig. 10) in fluid communication with the actuator, wherein the hydraulic circuit allows pressurized hydraulic fluid to be supplied to the actuator that regulates the floating movement of the base cutter assembly relative to the header frame, the hydraulic circuit including a flow control valve (214, 216) that regulates a flow of the hydraulic fluid supplied to and expelled from the actuator (paragraphs 0061-62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the header arrangement of Palmute with the hydraulic circuit Karst as an alternative way of ensuring the cutter floats over the ground during harvesting. Regarding claim 13, Palmute, of the resultant combination, discloses the header of claim 12, wherein the base cutter assembly is coupled to the header frame in a pantographic arrangement (2, 5, 6, 17). Regarding claim 14, Palmute, of the resultant combination, discloses the header of claim 13, wherein the linkage assembly comprises first and second pivot arms () pivotably coupling the base cutter assembly to the header frame, with the first and second pivot arms forming a four-bar linkage with the base cutter assembly and the header frame (see fig. 1-2). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-3, 8-10, 15-20 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE RUNCO whose telephone number is (469)295-9123. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 M-F. 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 5712728971. 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. /M.I.R./ Examiner, Art Unit 3671 /JOSEPH M ROCCA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 23, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Dec 22, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593745
CUTTING DEVICE FOR CUTTING PLANTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582043
CENTRIFUGAL ORBITAL FLOWER CUTTER WITH AN IRIS BLADE FOLLOWER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575502
COMBINE HARVESTER CONCAVE FRAME ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568884
DOUBLE-SWING-ROD MECHANISM AND FRUIT PICKING MACHINE USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568885
AGRICULTURAL MOUNTED IMPLEMENT WITH CLEANING UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+9.6%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 251 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month