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
This is the third Office Action on the merits. Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-20 are currently pending. Claims 1, 3, 5, and 7-8 are currently amended and claims 2, 4, and 6 have been cancelled. This action is final.
Response to Amendment
Amendments, filed on 06/22/2026, have been entered.
In view of the claims, Applicant’s amendments have been acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 6-11, filed 06/22/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 3, 5, 7-20 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Stanhope (US20200284886A1), hereinafter Stanhope, does not support the claimed control actions because Stanhope’s response to an obscured region is to disregard the data, not alert an operator or move the sensor. Examiner does not find this persuasive as the argument addresses Stanhope individually, whereas the rejection relies on the combination of Foster et al. (US20210132028A1) in view of Wu et al. (US10255670), and further in view of Stanhope, hereinafter Foster and Wu, respectively. Additionally, claims 1 and 11 only require that obscure region to be detected and that a control action follows. It does not say anything about what happens to the obscured data itself. So, Stanhope choosing to disregard the data is beside the point, and if anything, shows that detecting the obscurity causes the system to do something after, which is the same detect-then-act pattern that is claimed. Furthermore, Foster already supplies a system that detects a condition and automatically responds either by notifying the operator or moving the actuator. So, applying the same setup to Stanhope’s obscurity detection is a predictable use of Foster’s known control technique, as discussed below. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive, and the rejections are maintained.
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.
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, 3, 5, 8-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster in view of Wu.
Regarding claim 1, Foster discloses an agricultural system for monitoring field conditions of a field ("systems…for monitoring field conditions of a field", [0025]) after an agricultural operation in the field ("sensor(s) 152, 160 may be configured to continuously or periodically capture data associated with a portion of the field, such as immediately…after the performance of an agricultural operation within such portion of the field", [0055]), the agricultural system comprising: an agricultural implement comprising a frame ("implement 10 may include a frame 28", [0031]) and ground-engaging tools supported on the frame ("the implement frame 28 may be configured to support other ground engaging tools", [0034]), the ground-engaging tools being configured to engage a field during an agricultural operation ("the implement 10 is configured to work the soil during the performance of the associated agricultural operation", [0038], implicit that the ground-engaging tool is a part of the implement 10 configured to engage with the ground during agricultural operation); a sensor supported on the agricultural implement ("a sensor supported on an agricultural implement", [0006]), the sensor having a field of view directed towards an aft portion of the field disposed rearward of the agricultural implement relative to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement ("the rearward sensor 152 may be supported relative to the implement 10 such that the field of view 152A of the rearward sensor is directed towards an aft portion of the field disposed rearward of the implement 10 relative to the direction of travel 14", [0037]), the sensor being configured to generate data indicative of a field condition associated with the aft portion of the field ("The sensor is configured to generate data indicative of the field condition associated with the aft portion of the field", [0006]); an actuator configured to selectively move the sensor relative to the agricultural implement such that the field of view of the sensor ("controlling an operation of an actuator to actuate a sensor along a sensor movement path”, [0069]); and a computing system ("controller" 202) communicatively coupled to the sensor and the actuator ("the system 200 may include a controller 202 and various other components configured to be communicatively coupled to and/or controlled by the controller 202, such as a sensing assembly (e.g., sensing assembly 150) having one or more sensors configured to capture field conditions of a field (e.g., sensor(s) 152,160) and one or more actuators (e.g., actuator(s) 154", [0052]), the computing system being configured to: receive the data generated by the sensor ("The controller is configured to receive data from the sensor", [0006]); and perform a control action (FIG. 9, 406), the control action comprising one or both of: automatically controlling an operation of a user interface to indicate the field condition of the aft portion ("the controller 202 may further be configured to control the operation of the user interface 60 to notify an operator of the field conditions, performance efficiency of the implement 10, and/or the like", [0061], “the control action may include automatically... notifying an operator of the present field conditions.”, [0066]); or automatically controlling an operation of the actuator to move the sensor such that the field of view of the sensor is moved ("automatically… controlling the operation of the sensor actuator 164 to move the sensor 152 to adjust the field of view 152A of the sensor 152 (e.g., direct the field of view 152A towards an area-of-interest)", [0066]).
However, Foster does not teach of sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to an aft end of the agricultural implement; determine whether the portion of the field is obscured based at least in part on the data generated by the sensor; when the portion of the field is obscured; and field is obscured.
Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to an aft end of the agricultural implement (“The camera or smartphone units 50 look forward and rearward. The example camera or smartphone rods 52 are extendable or telescopic (up, down or outward), or can be rotated, tilted or are articulated to bend up to 90-180 degrees (e.g., 180 degrees for folding the rods 52 on the side of the cab)”, Col. 14 lines 10-14).
However, Wu does not teach to determine whether the portion of the field is obscured based at least in part on the data generated by the sensor; when the portion of the field is obscured; and field is obscured.
Stanhope, in the same field of endeavor, teaches to determine whether the portion of the field is obscured based at least in part on the data generated by the sensor (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]); and when the portion of the field is obscured (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]); and the field is obscured (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of Foster with teaching of Wu to move the sensor view along the direction of travel and Stanhope to determine whether the sensor’s field of view is obscured based on the sensor data and perform an action based on this determination with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve sensing capabilities such as response time by moving ahead of the vehicle in a longitudinal direction (Wu, Col. 8 lines 4-8), and to identify areas where there will be low-quality sensor data, allowing the system to adjust in response (Stanhope, [0030]). In addition to improve the accuracy and reliability of the system’s control decisions by preventing the system from acting on unreliable data (Stanhope, [0003])
Regarding claim 3, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 1 as stated above.
However, modified Foster does not explicitly teach of wherein the computing system is configured to determine whether the aft portion of the field is obscured by performing data analysis on the data generated by the sensor.
Stanhope, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of wherein the computing system is configured to determine whether the aft portion of the field is obscured by performing data analysis on the data generated by the sensor (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with the teaching of Stanhope of identifying an obscure region of the field with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to identify areas where there will be low-quality sensor data, allowing the system to adjust in response (Stanhope, [0030]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 1 as stated above, wherein the computing system ("controller" 202) is further configured to: receive an input from an operator via the user interface indicative of moving the sensor ("The controller being further configured to control an operation of the actuator to actuate the sensor along the sensor movement path such that the field of view is directed towards the area-of-interest within the field", [0007], "controller 202 may be configured to receive an input from…an operator, e.g., via the user interface 60", [0068]); and control an operation of the actuator to move the sensor such that the field of view of the sensor is moved ("The controller being further configured to control an operation of the actuator to actuate the sensor along the sensor movement path such that the field of view is directed towards the area-of-interest within the field", [0007]) based at least in part on the input received via the user interface ("controller 202 may be configured to receive an input from…an operator, e.g., via the user interface 60", [0068]).
However, modified Foster does not explicitly teach of relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement.
Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement (“The camera or smartphone units 50 look forward and rearward. The example camera or smartphone rods 52 are extendable or telescopic (up, down or outward), or can be rotated, tilted or are articulated to bend up to 90-180 degrees (e.g., 180 degrees for folding the rods 52 on the side of the cab)”, Col. 14 lines 10-14).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with teaching of Wu to move the sensor view along the direction of travel with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve sensing capabilities such as response time by moving ahead of the vehicle in a longitudinal direction (Wu, Col. 8 lines 4-8).
Regarding claim 8, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 1 as stated above, wherein the computing system ("controller" 202) is further configured to: determine the field condition associated with the aft portion of the field based on the data received from the sensor when the aft portion of the field is determined to not be obscured ("the controller 202 may monitor one or more field conditions associated with the portions of the field captured within the field of view of the sensor based on an assessment or analysis of the data received from the sensor”, [0065], inherently occurs when field is not obscured); and control an operation of the agricultural implement based at least in part on the field condition ("the controller may be configured to adjust the operation of the implement based on the determined condition(s) within the area-of-interest", [0026]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 1 as stated above, wherein the actuator comprises at least one actuator (“The system further included an actuator configured to actuate the sensor”, [0007]), the at least one actuator being configured to at least one of linearly actuate the sensor ("controlling an operation of an actuator to actuate a sensor along a sensor movement path”, [0069]).
However, modified Foster does not teach of along the direction of travel relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement or rotatably actuate the sensor relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement such that the field of view of the sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement.
Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of along the direction of travel relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement or rotatably actuate the sensor relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement such that the field of view of the sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement (“The camera or smartphone units 50 look forward and rearward. The example camera or smartphone rods 52 are extendable or telescopic (up, down or outward), or can be rotated, tilted or are articulated to bend up to 90-180 degrees (e.g., 180 degrees for folding the rods 52 on the side of the cab)”, Col. 14 lines 10-14).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with teaching of Wu to move the sensor view along the direction of travel with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve sensing capabilities such as response time by moving ahead of the vehicle in a longitudinal direction (Wu, Col. 8 lines 4-8).
Regarding claim 10, modified Foster discloses wherein the sensor is a LIDAR sensor or a camera ("the rearward sensor 152 may be configured as a LIDAR device(s) and/or a camera(s)", [0037]).
Regarding claim 11, Foster teaches of an agricultural method for monitoring field conditions of a field ("methods for monitoring field conditions of a field", [0025]) after an agricultural operation with an agricultural implement in the field ("sensor(s) 152, 160 may be configured to continuously or periodically capture data associated with a portion of the field, such as immediately…after the performance of an agricultural operation within such portion of the field", [0055]), the agricultural implement comprising a frame ("implement 10 may include a frame 28", [0031]) and ground-engaging tools supported on the frame ("the implement frame 28 may be configured to support other ground engaging tools", [0034]), the ground-engaging tools being configured to engage a field during the agricultural operation ("the implement 10 is configured to work the soil during the performance of the associated agricultural operation", [0038], implicit that the ground-engaging tool is a part of the implement 10 configured to engage with the ground during agricultural operation), the agricultural method comprising: receiving, with a computing system, data generated by a sensor ("The controller is configured to receive data from the sensor", [0006]) supported on the agricultural implement ("a sensor supported on an agricultural implement", [0006]), the sensor having a field of view directed towards an aft portion of the field disposed rearward of the agricultural implement relative to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement ("the rearward sensor 152 may be supported relative to the implement 10 such that the field of view 152A of the rearward sensor is directed towards an aft portion of the field disposed rearward of the implement 10 relative to the direction of travel 14", [0037]), the data being indicative of a field condition associated with the aft portion of the field ("The sensor is configured to generate data indicative of the field condition associated with the aft portion of the field", [0006]); and controlling, with the computing system, an operation of an actuator to move the sensor relative to the agricultural implement based on field conditions of the aft portion of the field ("based on the monitored field condition…controlling the operation of the sensor actuator 164 to move the sensor 152 to adjust the field of view 152A of the sensor 152 (e.g., direct the field of view 152A towards an area-of-interest)", [0066], "the rearward sensor 152 may be supported relative to the implement 10 such that the field of view 152A of the rearward sensor is directed towards an aft portion of the field disposed rearward of the implement 10 relative to the direction of travel 14", [0037]).
However, Foster does not explicitly teach of determining, with the computing system, whether the aft portion of the field is obscured based at least in part on the data generated by the sensor; when the field condition of the portion of the field is obscured; and such that the field of view of the sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to an aft end of the agricultural implement.
Stanhope, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of determining, with the computing system, whether the aft portion of the field is obscured based at least in part on the data generated by the sensor (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]); and when the field condition of the portion of the field is obscured (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]).
However, Stanhope does not teach of such that the field of view of the sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to an aft end of the agricultural implement.
Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of moves along the direction of travel relative to an aft end of the agricultural implement (“The camera or smartphone units 50 look forward and rearward. The example camera or smartphone rods 52 are extendable or telescopic (up, down or outward), or can be rotated, tilted or are articulated to bend up to 90-180 degrees (e.g., 180 degrees for folding the rods 52 on the side of the cab)”, Col. 14 lines 10-14).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of Foster with the teaching of Stanhope of identifying an obscure region of the field and the teaching of Wu to move the sensor view along the direction of travel with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to identify areas where there will be low-quality sensor data, allowing the system to adjust in response (Stanhope, [0030]), and improve sensing capabilities such as response time by moving ahead of the vehicle in a longitudinal direction (Wu, Col. 8 lines 4-8).
Regarding claim 12, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 11 as stated above, additionally of, controlling, with the computing system, an operation of a user interface to display the data generated by the sensor (“the controller 202 may further be configured to control the operation of the user interface 60 to notify an operator of the field conditions”, [0061]); and receiving, with the computing system, an input from an operator via the user interface (“receive an input from one or more sensors 152, 160 or an operator, e.g., via the user interface 60”, [0068]).
However, modified Foster does not teach of wherein determining whether the aft portion of the field is obscured comprises: receiving input indicative of a portion of the field being obscured.
Stanhope, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of wherein determining whether the aft portion of the field is obscured (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]) comprises: receiving input indicative of a portion of the field being obscured (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field based on data received from the sensor”, [0006]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with the teaching of Stanhope of identifying an obscure region of the field with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to identify areas where there will be low-quality sensor data, allowing the system to adjust in response (Stanhope, [0030]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 11 as stated above, additionally, of performing, with the computing system, data analysis of the data generated by the sensor ("the controller 202 may monitor one or more field conditions associated with the portions of the field captured within the field of view of the sensor based on an assessment or analysis of the data received from the sensor 152", [0065]).
However, modified Foster does not teach of wherein determining whether the aft portion of the field is obscured.
Stanhope, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of wherein determining whether the aft portion of the field is obscured (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field”, [0006]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with the teaching of Stanhope of identifying an obscure region of the field with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to identify areas where there will be low-quality sensor data, allowing the system to adjust in response (Stanhope, [0030]).
Regarding claim 15, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 14 as stated above, further comprising: controlling, with the computer system, an operation of a user interface to indicate field conditions of the aft portion of the field ("the controller 202 may further be configured to control the operation of the user interface 60 to notify an operator of the field conditions, performance efficiency of the implement 10, and/or the like", [0061]); and receiving, with the computing system, an input from an operator via the user interface indicative of moving the sensor ("The controller being further configured to control an operation of the actuator to actuate the sensor along the sensor movement path such that the field of view is directed towards the area-of-interest within the field", [0007], "controller 202 may be configured to receive an input from…an operator, e.g., via the user interface 60", [0068]), wherein controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor comprises controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor such that the field of view of the sensor is moved relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement ("controlling the operation of the sensor actuator 164 to move the sensor 152 to adjust the field of view 152A of the sensor 152 (e.g., direct the field of view 152A towards an area-of-interest)", [0066]) based at least in part on the input received via the user interface ("controller 202 may be configured to receive an input from…an operator, e.g., via the user interface 60", [0068]).
However, modified Foster does not explicitly teach to indicate that the portion of the field is obscured.
Stanhope, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of to indicate that the portion of the field is obscured (“the controller may be configured to identify an obscure region within the generated initial three-dimensional representation of the field”, [0006]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with the teaching of Stanhope of identifying an obscure region of the field with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to identify areas where there will be low-quality sensor data, allowing the system to adjust in response (Stanhope, [0030]).
Regarding claim 16, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 11 as stated above, further comprising: determining, with the computing system, the field condition associated with the aft portion of the field based on the data received from the sensor when the aft portion of the field is determined to not be obscured ("the controller 202 may monitor one or more field conditions associated with the portions of the field captured within the field of view of the sensor based on an assessment or analysis of the data received from the sensor”, [0065], inherently occurs when field is not obscured); and controlling, with the computing system, an operation of the agricultural implement based at least in part on the field condition ("the controller may be configured to adjust the operation of the implement based on the determined condition(s) within the area-of-interest", [0026]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 16 as stated above, additionally, wherein the field condition comprises at least one of a surface roughness, a surface levelness, a clod size, a residue coverage, soil compaction, or moisture content ("field conditions associated with…at least one of a surface roughness, clod size, residue coverage, soil compaction, and/or the like of the aft portion of the field", [0037]).
Regarding claim 18, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 11 as stated above, wherein controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor comprises controlling the operation of the actuator ("controller may receive an indication of desired area-of-interest within the field from an operator…or supplemental data from one or more secondary sensors configured to detect parameters indicative of…field conditions, such as moisture content, etc. …Upon the determination of an area-of-interest within the field, the sensor may be moved along its associated sensor movement path", [0026]).
However, modified Foster does not explicitly teach of at least one of linearly or rotatably actuate the sensor relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement such that the field of view of the sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement.
Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches of at least one of linearly or rotatably actuate the sensor relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement such that the field of view of the sensor moves along the direction of travel relative to the aft end of the agricultural implement (“The camera or smartphone units 50 look forward and rearward. The example camera or smartphone rods 52 are extendable or telescopic (up, down or outward), or can be rotated, tilted or are articulated to bend up to 90-180 degrees (e.g., 180 degrees for folding the rods 52 on the side of the cab)”, Col. 14 lines 10-14).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with teaching of Wu to move the sensor view along the direction of travel with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve sensing capabilities such as response time by moving ahead of the vehicle in a longitudinal direction (Wu, Col. 8 lines 4-8).
Regarding claim 19, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 11 as stated above, additionally, wherein controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor comprises automatically controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor ("automatically…controlling the operation of the sensor actuator 164 to move the sensor 152 to adjust the field of view 152A of the sensor 152", [0066]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 11 as stated above, additionally, wherein the sensor is a LIDAR sensor or a camera ("the rearward sensor 152 may be configured as a LIDAR device(s) and/or a camera(s)", [0037]).
Claims 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster in view of Wu in view of Stanhope, and further in view of Eggenhaus et al. (US20120178509A1), hereinafter Eggenhaus.
Regarding claim 7, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 1 as stated above, additionally, wherein the computing system is further configured to determine ("the controller may also be configured to generate a field condition map for the field based at least in part on the data received from the sensor. More particularly, the data received from the sensor may be geo-referenced such that an estimated field condition(s) may be determined", [0027]), wherein controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor comprises controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor ("controlling an operation of an actuator to actuate a sensor along a sensor movement path”, [0069]).
However, modified Foster does not explicitly teach to determine at least one of a height of dust above a surface of the field, a density of the dust, or a direction of wind based at least in part on the data, and based at least in part on the at least one of the height of the dust, the density of the dust, or the direction of wind.
Eggenhaus, in the same field of endeavor, teaches to determine at least one of a height of dust above a surface of the field, a density of the dust, or a direction of wind based at least in part on the data (“wind anemometer in the rear region of the combine harvester, measurement signal are generated…”, [0007], “signals that represent the wind direction”, [0015]), and based at least in part on the at least one of the height of the dust, the density of the dust, or the direction of wind (“wind anemometer in the rear region of the combine harvester, measurement signal are generated…”, [0007], “signals that represent the wind direction”, [0015]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with the teachings of Eggenhaus to measure the wind direction with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to adapt operations of the agricultural vehicle to changing environmental conditions caused by wind (Eggenhaus, [0003]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Foster teaches of all limitations of claim 11 as stated above, further comprising determining, with the computing system ("the controller may also be configured to generate a field condition map for the field based at least in part on the data received from the sensor. More particularly, the data received from the sensor may be geo-referenced such that an estimated field condition(s) may be determined", [0027]), wherein controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor comprises controlling the operation of the actuator to move the sensor ("controlling an operation of an actuator to actuate a sensor along a sensor movement path”, [0069]).
However, modified Foster does not explicitly teach to determine at least one of a height of dust above a surface of the field, a density of the dust, or a direction of wind based at least in part on the data, and based at least in part on the at least one of the height of the dust, the density of the dust, or the direction of wind.
Eggenhaus, in the same field of endeavor, teaches to determine at least one of a height of dust above a surface of the field, a density of the dust, or a direction of wind based at least in part on the data (“wind anemometer in the rear region of the combine harvester, measurement signal are generated…”, [0007], “signals that represent the wind direction”, [0015]), and based at least in part on the at least one of the height of the dust, the density of the dust, or the direction of wind (“wind anemometer in the rear region of the combine harvester, measurement signal are generated…”, [0007], “signals that represent the wind direction”, [0015]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have modified the agricultural system of modified Foster with the teachings of Eggenhaus to measure the wind direction with reasonable expectations of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to adapt operations of the agricultural vehicle to changing environmental conditions caused by wind (Eggenhaus, [0003]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL LEE ESPINOZA whose telephone number is (571)272-4889. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at (571) 270-5376. 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.
ABIGAIL LEE ESPINOZA
Examiner
Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights