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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed August 11th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9, 16-17, and 19-24 remain pending in the application.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Humpal et al. (US 20220192174 A1) in view of Sullivan et al. (US 20160175869 A1) and Solie et al. (US 20030019949 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Humpal discloses an agricultural system (100, Figs. 1A, 1C), comprising:
a product application system (108, Fig. 1A) at least partially supported by the boom arm (118, shown in Fig. 1A), the product application system (108, Fig. 1A) comprising:
one or more nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A); and
an actuator (182, Fig. 1C) configured to rotate the one or more nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A) between a first position and a second position about a lateral axis of rotation (actuators 182 allow rotation of boom arms 136, 138 of boom 118 that include the nozzles 120 about pivot points 144, 146 to different desired positions, which includes at least a first position and a second position, shown in Fig. 1A, Paragraphs 0070, 0078), the first position and the second position each defined with the boom arm in the unfolded position (actuators 182 move various portions of boom 118 that include the nozzles 120 to different desired positions, which includes at least a first position and a second position in an unfolded position, shown in Fig. 1A, Paragraph 0078);
a target sensor (122, Figs. 1A-1B) configured to capture data indicative of one or more features within a field (sensors 122 can identify targets and their actual locations on the ground, Paragraph 0074); and
a computing system (160, Fig. 1C) communicatively coupled to the product application system (108, control system 160 controls nozzle bodies 120 within spray system 108, Fig. 1A, Paragraph 0074) and the target sensor (122, sensors 122 generates outputs to the control system 160 to indicate which nozzles to be activated, Figs. 1A-1B, Paragraph 0077), the computing system (160, Fig. 1C) being configured to:
identify a target within the field based on the data from the target sensor (sensors 122 can identify targets and their actual locations on the ground through image capturing and processing and provide this information to control system 160, Paragraph 0074);
determine a nozzle activation time defined by a period between capturing of the data from the target sensor and a nozzle spray fan aligning with the target, the nozzle activation time being at least partially based on a vehicle speed and a processing time of the computing system (sensors 122 and target identification system 158 provide information to the control system 160 to indicate which nozzles are to be activated based on proximity to the target and a duration of time they are activated, Paragraphs 0077, 0082, 0101-0103, 0222); and
activate the actuator to rotate the one or more nozzle assemblies between the first position and the second position based on the nozzle activation time exceeding a defined nozzle time range (boom position controller 174, which is a part of control system 160, moves various portions of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through the actuators 182 to desired positions based on various disruptions, such as time of travel from the nozzle to the target taking too long, to the agricultural machine 100, which can cause the orientation and perspective of the sensors 122 to change which further causes the nozzle activation time duration to change due to changes in nozzle height, shown in Fig. 23, Paragraphs 0078, 0083, 0101-0102, 0107, 0182), and wherein a rotational range of the actuator is at least partially based on a height of the one or more nozzle assemblies relative to the field (each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182, Paragraph 0142).
However, Humpal does not explicitly disclose a boom arm movable between an unfolded position and a folded position.
Sullivan teaches an agricultural system (20, Fig. 1) comprising a boom arm (32, Fig. 1) movable between an unfolded position and a folded position (boom assembly 32 has hinges 58 that facilitate folding and unfolding of the boom assembly, Paragraph 0024).
Humpal and Sullivan are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of agricultural systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the boom arm in Sullivan’s system to Humpal’s system, to have the motivation to provide a position that is suitable for transportation and operation of the agricultural system (Sullivan, Paragraph 0028).
However, Humpal and Sullivan do not teach wherein the second position is vehicle rearward of a vertical axis and the amount of rearward movement increases with increasing vehicle speed to increase reaction time.
Solie teaches wherein the second position is vehicle rearward of a vertical axis and the amount of rearward movement increases with increasing vehicle speed to increase reaction time (shown in Figs. 2-3, Paragraphs 0011, 0043, 0054).
Humpal, Sullivan, and Solie are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of agricultural systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching in Solie’s system to Humpal’s system, as modified by Sullivan, to have the motivation to implement precision farming practices to increase crop yields and prevent over application and under application (Solie, Paragraphs 0006-0008).
With respect to claim 2, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 1. Humpal further discloses a sensing system (414, Fig. 10) configured to capture data indicative of one or more spray conditions (real-time sensors sense variable values in real-time, which include spray pressure, velocity, etc., Paragraphs 0208-0209).
In regards to claim 3, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 2. Humpal further discloses the nozzle activation time is based at least partially on one or more spray conditions (detecting or accessing the variable values used determines the nozzle actuation timing, Paragraph 0208).
Regarding claim 4, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 3. Humpal further discloses the spray conditions can include at least one of an airflow at the one or more nozzle assemblies, an agricultural product application rate, an agricultural product pressure within a header, a vehicle speed, or a turning speed (real-time sensors sense variable values in real-time, which include spray pressure, velocity, etc., Paragraphs 0208-0209).
In regards to claim 5, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 1. Humpal further discloses the actuator (182, Fig. 1C) is configured to rotate the nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A) from a first angle relative to the field to a second angle relative to the field (based on calibration parameters of each sensor 122, the boom 118 which includes nozzles 120 can be moved through actuators 182 to different target heights and angle, relative to the ground, Paragraphs 0078, 0083, 0107, 0130).
With respect to 6, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 5. Humpal further discloses a focal axis (interpreting as a line through two particular points in the plane of the sensor, “Ellipses”, University of Minnesota (NPL), shown in Figs. 1D, 34, Paragraph 0066) of the target sensor (122, Figs. 1A-1B) is separated from a spray axis (vertical axis of spray coming from nozzles 120, shown in Figs. 1A-1B, 1D, 34) of the one or more nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A) by a first distance (D4, Fig. 34) when in the first position (boom 118 that include the nozzles 120 is moved to a first position which has a specific height and angle from the sensor 122, Paragraphs 0078, 0083, 0107, 0130), and wherein the focal axis (shown in Fig. 1D, Paragraph 0066) of the target sensor (122, Figs. 1A-1B) is separated from the spray axis (vertical axis of spray coming from nozzles 120, shown in Figs. 1A-1B, 1D, 34) of the one or more nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A) by a second distance (D5, Fig. 34) in the second position (boom 118 that include the nozzles 120 is moved to a second position which has a specific height and angle from the sensor 122, Paragraphs 0078, 0083, 0107, 0130), the second distance being greater than the first distance (shown in Fig. 34).
Regarding claim 7, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 1. Humpal further discloses the nozzle activation time is at least partially based on a processing time of the computing system (time required to execute a task depends on various processing times of commands the control system sends to various components in the machine, Paragraph 0213).
In regards to claim 9, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 1. Humpal further discloses the actuator (182, Fig. 1C) is configured to rotate the one or more nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A) within a rotational range (there is an acceptable range of angles for the boom 118 and therefore the rotational range of which the actuator 182 can rotate the boom 118 and its nozzles 120, Paragraph 0127), and wherein the rotational range is at least partially based on a height of the nozzle assembly relative to the field (each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182, Paragraph 0142).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Humpal et al. (US 20220192174 A1) in view of Sullivan et al. (US 20160175869 A1) and Solie et al. (US 20030019949 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Creaby et al. (US 20220203978 A1).
With respect to claim 8, Humpal, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, discloses the system of claim 1. However, Humpal, Sullivan, and Solie do not teach a header as claimed.
Creaby teaches an agricultural system (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising the one or more nozzle assemblies (not explicitly shown but there are one or more sprayers on the implement 121, Paragraph 0050) are fluidly coupled with a header (121, implement 121 can be a header and one or more sprayers can be a mechanism on the implement 121, Paragraphs 0042, 0050), and wherein the actuator (356, Fig. 3) rotates the header (102, actuator(s) 356 can be controlled to move in a specified manner, such as rotating by a specified amount, to provide movement to various components of the vehicle such as the header 121, Paragraph 0054) to move the one or more nozzle assemblies (not explicitly shown but there are one or more sprayers on the implement 121, which can be moved along with the implement 121 when rotated by the actuator(s) 356, Paragraphs 0050, 0054) between the first position and the second position (actuator(s) 356 can be controlled to move in a specified manner, including a first position and a second position, Paragraph 0054).
Humpal, Sullivan, Solie, and Creaby are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of agricultural systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the header in Creaby’s system to Humpal’s system, as modified by Sullivan and Solie, to have the motivation to reduce oscillations to specific locations of elongated implements while an agricultural system is moving (Creaby, Paragraphs 0004, 0050).
Claims 16-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Humpal et al. (US 20220192174 A1) in view of Creaby et al. (US 20220203978 A1) and Solie et al. (US 20030019949 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Humpal discloses an agricultural system (100, Figs. 1A, 1C) comprising:
a product application system (108, Fig. 1A) comprising:
a nozzle assembly (120, Fig. 1A); and
an actuator (182, Fig. 1C), wherein a rotational range of the actuator is at least partially based on a height of the nozzle assembly relative to the field (each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182, Paragraph 0142);
a sensing system (414, Fig. 10) configured to capture data indicative of one or more spray conditions including vehicle speed (real-time sensors sense variable values in real-time, which include spray pressure, velocity, etc., and speed of machine 100, Paragraphs 0076, 0208-0209);
a target sensor (122, Figs. 1A-1B) configured to capture data indicative of one or more features within a field (sensors 122 can identify targets and their actual locations on the ground, Paragraph 0074); and
a computing system (160, Fig. 1C) communicatively coupled to the product application system (108, control system 160 controls nozzle bodies 120 within spray system 108, Fig. 1A, Paragraph 0074), the target sensor (122, sensors 122 generates outputs to the control system 160 to indicate which nozzles to be activated, Figs. 1A-1B, Paragraph 0077), and the sensing system (414, target identification system 158 which include sensors 122 send signals to the control system 160 to control the nozzle controller 170 and nozzle activation control system 246 which includes real-time sensors 414, Fig. 10, Paragraphs 0074, 0224), the computing system (160, Fig. 1C) being configured to:
identify a target within the field based on the data from the target sensor (sensors 122 can identify targets and their actual locations on the ground through image capturing and processing and provide this information to control system 160, Paragraph 0074);
determine a nozzle activation time defined by a period between the capturing of the data from the target sensor and a nozzle spray fan aligning with the target based on the data from the sensing system, the nozzle activation time further being based on vehicle speed and processing time of the computing system (sensors 122 and target identification system 158 provide information to the control system 160 to indicate which nozzles are to be activated based on proximity to the target and a duration of time they are activated, Paragraphs 0077, 0082, 0101-0103, 0222); and
activate the actuator to rotate relative to the lateral axis of rotation from the first position to the second position in response to the nozzle activation time exceeding a defined nozzle time range (a spray operation confidence level can be generated using information from boom sensors 126 detecting boom or nozzle height being too high, which causes a time period of spray coming from a nozzle to a target to be too long, which can then be used to control boom position actuators 182 to move various portions of boom 118 including nozzles 120 to different desired positions, including rotating boom arms 136 and 138 about pivot points 144 and 146, shown in Figs. 1D, 34, Paragraphs 0066, 0070, 0078, 0083, 0115, 0182).
However, Humpal does not disclose a header, an actuator operably coupled with the header, and the computing system being configured to activate the actuator to rotate the header relative to a lateral axis of rotation from the first position to the second position in response to the nozzle activation time deviating from a defined nozzle time range.
Creaby teaches an agricultural system (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising a header (121, implement 121 can be a header, Fig. 1, Paragraph 0042);
a nozzle assembly (not explicitly shown but there are one or more sprayers on the implement 121, Paragraph 0050) fluidly coupled with the header (121, implement 121 can be a header and one or more sprayers can be a mechanism on the implement 121, Fig. 1, Paragraphs 0042, 0050); and
an actuator (356, Fig. 3) operably coupled with the header (121, actuator(s) 356 can be controlled to move in a specified manner to provide movement to various components of the vehicle such as the header 121, Fig. 1, Paragraph 0054) and configured to rotate the nozzle assembly (120, Fig. 1A) between a first position and a second position through rotation on the header (121, Fig. 1) about a lateral axis of rotation (actuator(s) 356 can be controlled to move in a specified manner, such as rotating, lifting, or lowering by a specified amount on its lateral axis of rotation, to provide movement to various components of the vehicle such as the header 121, and not explicitly shown but there are one or more sprayers on the implement 121, which can be moved along with the implement 121 when rotated by the actuator(s) 356 when controlled to move in a specified manner, including a first position and a second position, Paragraphs 0050, 0054); and
the computing system (360, Fig. 3) being configured to:
activate the actuator to rotate the header relative to the lateral axis of rotation from the first position to the second position (control unit 360 generates commands sent to actuator(s) 356 based on input data and sensor data, which includes moving the actuator(s) 356 to provide movement to various components of the vehicle, including the header 121, such as rotating by a specified amount from a first position to a second position relative to the lateral axis of rotation, Paragraphs 0043, 0049-0050, 0054).
Humpal and Creaby are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of agricultural systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the header in Creaby’s system to Humpal’s system, to have the motivation to reduce oscillations to specific locations of elongated implements while an agricultural system is moving (Creaby, Paragraphs 0004, 0050).
However, Humpal and Creaby do not teach the rotation of the header configured to increase a horizontal separation distance between a focal axis of the target sensor and a spray axis of the nozzle assembly proportionally to the vehicle speed to compensate for the deviation in the nozzle activation time, wherein the second position is vehicle rearward of a vertical axis and the amount of rotation increases with increasing vehicle speed to provide additional reaction time.
Solie teaches the rotation of the header (50, 46, Fig. 3) configured to increase a horizontal separation distance between a focal axis of the target sensor and a spray axis of the nozzle assembly proportionally to the vehicle speed to compensate for the deviation in the nozzle activation time (interpreting a focal axis as a line through two particular points in the plane of the sensor, “Ellipses”, University of Minnesota (NPL) and interpreting a spray axis as a vertical axis of spray coming from the nozzle, shown in Figs. 2-3, Paragraphs 0011, 0043, 0054), wherein the second position is vehicle rearward of a vertical axis and the amount of rotation increases with increasing vehicle speed to provide additional reaction time (shown in Figs. 2-3, Paragraphs 0011, 0043, 0054).
Humpal, Creaby, and Solie are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of agricultural systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching in Solie’s system to Humpal’s system, as modified by Creaby, to have the motivation to implement precision farming practices to increase crop yields and prevent over application and under application (Solie, Paragraphs 0006-0008).
Regarding claim 17, Humpal, as modified by Creaby and Solie, discloses the agricultural system of claim 16. Humpal further discloses the computing system (160, Fig. 1C) is further configured to:
activate the actuator to move the nozzle assembly between the first position and the second position based on the nozzle activation time deviating from a defined nozzle time range (boom position controller 174, which is a part of control system 160, moves various portions of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 to desired positions based on various disruptions to the agricultural machine 100, which can cause the orientation and perspective of the sensors 122 to change which further causes the nozzle activation time duration to change due to changes in nozzle height, shown in Fig. 23, Paragraphs 0078, 0083, 0101-0102, 0107, 0182).
Regarding claim 19, Humpal, as modified by Creaby and Solie, discloses the system of claim 16. Creaby further teaches the second position (dotted line, shown in Figs. 2A-2B) is vehicle rearward of a vertical axis (interpreting as a rearward direction with respect to a default axis of the one or more nozzle assemblies, shown in Figs. 2A-2B) defined between the nozzle assembly (not explicitly shown but there are one or more sprayers on the implement 221, Paragraph 0050) and the field (shown in Figs. 2A-2B).
With respect to claim 20, Humpal, as modified by Creaby and Solie, discloses the agricultural system of claim 16. Humpal further discloses the actuator (182, Fig. 1C) is configured to rotate the nozzle assembly (120, Fig. 1A) within a rotational range (there is an acceptable range of angles for the boom 118 and therefore the rotational range of which the actuator 182 can rotate the boom 118 and its nozzles 120, Paragraph 0127), and wherein the rotational range is at least partially based on a height of the nozzle assembly relative to the field (each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182, Paragraph 0142).
Claims 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Humpal et al. (US 20220192174 A1) in view of Creaby et al. (US 20220203978 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Humpal discloses an agricultural system (100, Figs. 1A, 1C), comprising:
a product application system (108, Fig. 1A) at least partially supported by the boom arm (118, shown in Fig. 1A), the product application system (108, Fig. 1A) comprising:
one or more nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A); and
an actuator (182, Fig. 1C), wherein the actuator is configured to rotate the one or more nozzle assemblies (120, Fig. 1A) from a first angle to a second angle relative to the field within a rotational range that is at least partially based on a height of the one or more nozzle assemblies relative to the field (each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182, Paragraph 0142);
a target sensor (122, Figs. 1A-1B) configured to capture data indicative of one or more features within a field (sensors 122 can identify targets and their actual locations on the ground, Paragraph 0074); and
a computing system (160, Fig. 1C) communicatively coupled to the product application system (108, control system 160 controls nozzle bodies 120 within spray system 108, Fig. 1A, Paragraph 0074) and the target sensor (122, sensors 122 generates outputs to the control system 160 to indicate which nozzles to be activated, Figs. 1A-1B, Paragraph 0077), the computing system (160, Fig. 1C) being configured to:
identify a target within the field based on the data from the target sensor (sensors 122 can identify targets and their actual locations on the ground through image capturing and processing and provide this information to control system 160, Paragraph 0074);
determine a nozzle activation time defined by a period between capturing of the data from the target sensor and a nozzle spray fan aligning with the target, wherein the nozzle activation time accounts for a processing time of the computing system (sensors 122 and target identification system 158 provide information to the control system 160 to indicate which nozzles are to be activated based on proximity to the target and a duration of time they are activated, Paragraphs 0077, 0082, 0101-0103, 0222); and
activate the actuator to rotate the one or more nozzle assemblies rearward between the first position and the second position based on the nozzle activation time exceeding a defined nozzle time range to increase reaction time (boom position controller 174, which is a part of control system 160, moves various portions of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through the actuators 182 to desired positions based on various disruptions to the agricultural machine 100, which can cause the orientation and perspective of the sensors 122 to change which further causes the nozzle activation time duration to change due to changes in nozzle height, shown in Fig. 23, Paragraphs 0078, 0083, 0101-0102, 0107, 0182), wherein a focal axis of the target sensor is separated from a spray axis of the one or more nozzle assemblies by a first horizontal distance at the field when in the first position, and wherein the focal axis of the target sensor is separated from the spray axis of the one or more nozzle assemblies by a second horizontal distance at the field in the second position, the second horizontal distance being greater than the first horizontal distance (change in orientation and perspective of the boom 118 and therefore nozzles 120 change orientation and perspective of the image sensors 122 and the locations of the images sensed by image sensors 122, and a first position and a second position of the nozzles 120 may have different horizontal distances between the focal axis of the sensors 122 and the spray axis of the nozzles 122, which can include the second horizontal distance being greater than the first horizontal distance, Paragraph 0083), the rotation being limited by a rotational range based on nozzle height relative to the field (each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182, Paragraph 0142).
However, Humpal does not disclose one or more nozzle assemblies fluidly coupled with a header, and an actuator configured to rotate the header to move the one or more nozzle assemblies.
Creaby teaches an agricultural system (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising one or more nozzle assemblies fluidly coupled with a header (not explicitly shown but there are one or more sprayers on the implement 121, Paragraph 0050);
an actuator (356, Fig. 3) configured to rotate the header (121, Fig. 1) to move the one or more nozzle assemblies between a first position and a second position about a lateral axis (Paragraphs 0050, 0054).
Humpal and Creaby are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of agricultural systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the actuator and header in Creaby’s system to Humpal’s system, to have the motivation to reduce oscillations to specific locations of elongated implements while an agricultural system is moving (Creaby, Paragraphs 0004, 0050).
In regards to claim 22, Humpal, as modified by Creaby, discloses the system of claim 21. Humpal further discloses a sensing system (414, Fig. 10) configured to capture data indicative of one or more spray conditions (real-time sensors sense variable values in real-time, which include spray pressure, velocity, etc., Paragraphs 0208-0209).
In regards to claim 23, Humpal, as modified by Creaby, discloses the system of claim 22. Humpal further discloses the nozzle activation time is based at least partially on one or more spray conditions (detecting or accessing the variable values used determines the nozzle actuation timing, Paragraph 0208).
With respect to claim 24, Humpal, as modified by Creaby, discloses the system of claim 23. Humpal further discloses the spray conditions can include at least one of an airflow at the one or more nozzle assemblies, an agricultural product application rate, an agricultural product pressure within a header, a vehicle speed, or a turning speed (real-time sensors sense variable values in real-time, which include spray pressure, velocity, etc., Paragraphs 0208-0209).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9, 16-17, and 19-20 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.
Applicant's arguments filed August 11th, 2026 with respect to claims 21-24 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that Humpal and Creaby do not teach the amended limitations of claim 21, see Remarks, pg. 15-19, Humpal, in view of Creaby does teach these features as noted above in the 103 rejection for claim 21. Specifically, Humpal discloses “the actuator is configured to rotate the one or more nozzle assemblies from a first angle to a second angle relative to the field within a rotational range that is at least partially based on a height of the one or more nozzle assemblies relative to the field”. Humpal states each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182 in paragraph 0142.
Humpal also discloses “determine a nozzle activation time defined by a period between capturing of the data from the target sensor and a nozzle spray fan aligning with the target, wherein the nozzle activation time accounts for a processing time of the computing system”. Humpal states sensors 122 and target identification system 158 provide information to the control system 160 to indicate which nozzles are to be activated based on proximity to the target and a duration of time they are activated (Paragraphs 0077, 0082). Humpal also states dimension/dynamics sensors and input mechanisms 412 obtain machine dimensions and machine dynamics that are used in the nozzle activation calculations. The dimensions and dynamics can be sensed, or they can be default dimensions and/or dynamics (Paragraphs 0101-0103, 0222).
Humpal discloses “activate the actuator to rotate the one or more nozzle assemblies rearward between the first position and the second position based on the nozzle activation time exceeding a defined nozzle time range to increase reaction time”. Humpal states boom position controller 174, which is a part of control system 160, moves various portions of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through the actuators 182 to desired positions based on various disruptions to the agricultural machine 100, which can cause the orientation and perspective of the sensors 122 to change which further causes the nozzle activation time duration to change due to changes in nozzle height (Fig. 23, Paragraphs 0078, 0083, 0101-0102, 0107, 0182).
Humpal also discloses “the rotation being limited by a rotational range based on nozzle height relative to the field”. Humpal states each target height is associated with a particular movement of the boom 118 and its nozzles 120 through actuator 182 (Paragraph 0142).
Humpal does not disclose a header, but Creaby provides a motivation to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the actuator and the header taught in Creaby to Humpal’s system because doing so reduces oscillations to specific locations of elongated implements while an agricultural system is moving (Creaby, Paragraphs 0004, 0050). This would allow Humpal’s system to have one or more nozzle assemblies fluidly coupled with a header, and an actuator configured to rotate the header to move the one or more nozzle assemblies between a first position and a second position about a lateral axis.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, see Remarks, pg. 15-19, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In reference to claim 21, there is a motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the actuator and the header taught in Creaby to Humpal’s system because doing so reduces oscillations to specific locations of elongated implements while an agricultural system is moving (Creaby, Paragraphs 0004, 0050). Combining Creaby’s actuator to Humpal’s system allows for Humpal’s system to have one or more nozzle assemblies fluidly coupled with a header, and the actuator is configured to rotate the header to move the one or more nozzle assemblies between a first position and a second position about a lateral axis.
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 Anna T Ho whose telephone number is (571)272-2587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, First Friday of Pay Period off.
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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/ANNA THI HO/Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/STEVEN M CERNOCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights