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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on April 6th 2023. These drawings are accepted.
Status of the Claims
This Non-Final action is in response to the applicant’s filing on December 16th 2025;
Claims 2, 6 and 17 are canceled.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-16 and 19-20 are pending and examined below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are moot. The examiner agrees that the prior art does not explicitly teach as it is currently recited in the claim language; " … wherein the first command is a change in a speed of the vehicle during a defined time, and wherein the second command alters one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle range based at least in part on the first command… and wherein the second command is generated prior to the first component being altered from a first condition to a second condition based on the first command…” Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn; However, upon further consideration a new ground(s) of rejection is made for claim over Harmon (Patent No. US20210252541A1) in view of Taylor (Patent No. US12572143B2) and Anderson (Patent No. US20220132723A1).
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, 3-5, and 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harmon (Patent No. US20210252541A1) in view of Taylor (Patent No. US12572143B2) and Anderson (Patent No. US20220132723A1).
Regarding claim 1 Harmon teaches a method for an agricultural application operation, the method comprising; (See Harmon paragraph 0044; “…method 200 for controlling the ground speed of an agricultural sprayer… “); receiving, through an input device, a first command to alter a parameter of an agricultural vehicle; (See Harmon paragraph 0037 and 0043; “…the user interface 120 may be configured to configured to receive user inputs from the operator (e.g., inputs associated with a predetermined range for the spray quality parameter(s))... The control signals may, in turn, instruct such components to adjust their operation…”); altering, with a computing system, a first component of the vehicle based on the first command;(See Harmon paragraph 0043; “…The control signals may, in turn, instruct such components to adjust their operation to increase or decrease the ground speed of the sprayer 10 as desired…”); determining, with the computing system, if any of one or more conditions respectively deviate from a defined condition range in response to altering the first component;(See Harmon paragraph 0017; “…the controller may be configured to control the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter. For example, in one embodiment, the controller may be configured to compare the determined spray quality parameter to a predetermined parameter range. Thereafter, when the determined spray quality parameter falls outside of the predetermined parameter range (thereby indicating the agricultural substance is not being applied at the target application rate and/or the spray quality has degraded), the controller may be configured to initiate a reduction in the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer until the spray quality parameter is returned to the predetermined parameter range.”); and generating, with the computing system, a second command to alter a second component of the vehicle based in part on the one or more conditions respectively deviating from the defined condition range; (See Harmon paragraph 0017-0018; “…For example, in one embodiment, the controller may be configured to compare the determined spray quality parameter to a predetermined parameter range. Thereafter, when the determined spray quality parameter falls outside of the predetermined parameter range (thereby indicating the agricultural substance is not being applied at the target application rate and/or the spray quality has degraded), the controller may be configured to initiate a reduction in the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer until the spray quality parameter is returned to the predetermined parameter range. Controlling the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter may ensure that the target application rate of the agricultural substance and/or the desired spray quality is maintained as sprayer travels across the field and field conditions change. In this respect, controlling the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter may improve agricultural outcomes.”).
Harmon does not explicitly teach but Taylor teaches; wherein the first command is a change in a speed of the vehicle during a defined time; (See Taylor column 5, line 63; “FIG. 3 that the screen shows a speed setting. The speed setting includes both a toggle button 44 and an increment button 46. When the toggle button has been set at the auto selection, the user display unit 10 will communicate to the planter to automatically adjust its speed based on an additional setting, such as the speed of the tow vehicle pulling or towing the planter. However, the selection can be switched to manual, wherein the speed can be incrementally changed, such as changing the speed or population of the row units of the planter to vary based upon the user input. Therefore, while two miles per hour shown as the speed, the increment button can be increased by the tenth or whole units to adjust the speed of the tow vehicle, towed vehicle, or some combination thereof. Therefore, the inclusion of the toggle and increment buttons provides for numerous adjustments for both the tow unit and/or towed vehicle or implement via the display unit 10.”);
and wherein the second command is generated prior to the first component being altered from a first condition to a second condition based on the first command; (See Taylor column 5, line 47-63; “For example, it is noted in FIG. 3 that the screen shows a speed setting. The speed setting includes both a toggle button 44 and an increment button 46. When the toggle button has been set at the auto selection, the user display unit 10 will communicate to the planter to automatically adjust its speed based on an additional setting, such as the speed of the tow vehicle pulling or towing the planter. However, the selection can be switched to manual, wherein the speed can be incrementally changed, such as changing the speed or population of the row units of the planter to vary based upon the user input. Therefore, while two miles per hour shown as the speed, the increment button can be increased by the tenth or whole units to adjust the speed of the tow vehicle, towed vehicle, or some combination thereof. Therefore, the inclusion of the toggle and increment buttons provides for numerous adjustments for both the tow unit and/or towed vehicle or implement via the display unit 10.”).
Harmon and Taylor are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Taylor first and second commands to alter the condition of the components. Harmon includes sensors and controller to add additional alteration commands, so it would be obvious to modify Harmon with Taylor commands for components alteration and its order. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding commands for components alteration and its order which would allow better control of the agricultural applicator. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Harmon does not explicitly teach but Anderson teaches; and wherein the second command alters one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle range based at least in part on the first command; (See Anderson paragraph 0098; “The operation of the fluid conveyance system is adjustable, such as automatically or manually, to vary a pressure, a flow rate of liquid, as well as various other fluid characteristics of spraying system 202. Spray nozzles 208 are coupled to and spaced apart along boom 210. In one example, the operation and position of spray nozzles 208 can be adjusted, such as automatically, semi-automatically, or manually. For example, the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) of nozzles 208 can be adjusted, as well as the volume or flow rate of liquid passing through nozzles 208 (such as by operation of a controllable valve) ...”; also see Anderson paragraph 0101; “A In operation, and by way of overview, the height of boom 210 (or arms 212 and 214) are set and sprayer 201 moves over field 206 in the direction indicated by arrow 246. As it moves, substance is conveyed from tank 204 through conduits in boom 210 and to and through nozzles 208 to be applied to vegetation on field 206. The application of substance on field 206 can be controllably adjusted. For example, but not by limitation, by varying the height of boom 210 (or arms 212 and 214) off of field 206, varying the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) of nozzles 208, varying the flow characteristics of the substance through the spraying system, etc.”).
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Anderson second command to alter one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle. Harmon includes sensors and controller to add additional alteration commands, so it would be obvious to modify Harmon with Anderson second command to alter one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding second command to alter one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 3 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the method of claim 1, Harmon further teaches and wherein the second command alters a pressure of an agricultural product within the agricultural application system; (See Harmon paragraph 0040; “The determined spray quality parameter(s) may correspond to any suitable parameter(s)/characteristic(s) indicative of the quality of the spray fans being dispensed by the nozzles… the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may include a pressure sensor 108 configured to capture data indicative of the pressure of the agricultural substance within the fluid conduit(s) 58. In such embodiments, the controller 112 may be configured to analyze the received sensor data to determine pressure of the agricultural substance being supplied to the nozzles 36. In addition, in a further embodiment, the determined spray quality parameter(s) may correspond to the airspeed of the air flowing past the boom assembly 40 of the sprayer 10. As described above, in several embodiments, the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may include an airspeed sensor 110 configured to capture data indicative of the airspeed of the air flowing past the boom assembly 40. In such embodiments, the controller 112 may be configured to analyze the received sensor data to determine airspeed of the air flowing past the boom assembly 40.”).
Harmon does not teach but Anderson teaches, wherein the first command raises a boom to a boom height relative to a field above a defined height; (See Anderson paragraph 0101; “In operation, and by way of overview, the height of boom 210 (or arms 212 and 214) are set and sprayer 201 moves over field 206 in the direction indicated by arrow 246. As it moves, substance is conveyed from tank 204 through conduits in boom 210 and to and through nozzles 208 to be applied to vegetation on field 206. The application of substance on field 206 can be controllably adjusted. For example, but not by limitation, by varying the height of boom 210 (or arms 212 and 214) off of field 206, varying the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) of nozzles 208, varying the flow characteristics of the substance through the spraying system, etc.”).
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Anderson first command raises a boom, it would be obvious to modify Harmon agricultural applicator with Anderson boom height change. Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding the command to adjust the boom height will allow more accurate and uniform application; No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding boom height change. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 4 Harmon in view of in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the method of claim 1, Harmon further teaches, and wherein the second command alters a weight of droplets of agricultural product exhausted from the one or more nozzle assemblies; (See Harmon paragraph 0046 and 0038; “Additionally, at (204), the method 200 may include determining, with the one or more computing devices, the spray quality parameter based on the received sensor data. For instance, as described above, the controller 112 may be configured to determine the spray quality parameter(s) based on the received sensor data… As the sprayer 10 travels across the field, each nozzle 36 may dispense a fan of the agricultural substance stored within the tank 32 onto the underlying field and/or plants at a target application rate. In general, the target application rate for an agricultural substance is an amount (e.g., a volume or weight) of the substance to be applied per unit area of the field (e.g., per acre) to provide the desired agricultural outcome (e.g., weed coverage reduction, pest reduction, and/or the like).”).
Harmon does not teach but Anderson teaches wherein the first command raises a boom to a boom height relative to a field above a defined height; (See Anderson paragraph 0129; “Boom position subsystem 1324 is configured to controllably adjust the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) or otherwise actuate movement of boom 210, including individual boom arms 212 and 214. For example, boom position subsystem 1324 can include a number of actuators (such as electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical or electromechanical actuators, as well as numerous other types of actuators) that are coupled to various components to adjust a position or orientation of boom 210 or individual boom arms 212 and 214. For instance, upon the detection of an upcoming change in crop height (e.g., detection of crop height increasing ahead of boom 210), action signals can be provided to boom position subsystem 1324 to adjust the position of boom 210 or boom arms 212 or 214 relative to agricultural surface 206, such that boom 210 will remain at a desired position relative to the crop canopy.”)
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Anderson first command raises a boom, it would be obvious to modify Harmon agricultural applicator with Anderson boom height change. Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding the command to adjust the boom height will allow more accurate and uniform application; No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding boom height change. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 5 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the method of claim 1, Harmon further teaches, and wherein the second command increases a width of a fan pattern relative to a pattern when the one or more nozzle assemblies is at the defined height; (See Harmon paragraph 0040; “The determined spray quality parameter(s) may correspond to any suitable parameter(s)/characteristic(s) indicative of the quality of the spray fans being dispensed by the nozzles. For example, in several embodiments, the determined spray quality parameter(s) may correspond to one or more spray fan parameters. As described above, in several embodiments, the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may include one or more imaging devices 104 configured to capture image data depicting the spray fans of one or more of the nozzles 36 of the sprayer 10. In such embodiments, the controller 112 may be configured to analyze the received image data to determine the shape(s) and/or size(s) (e.g., the width(s)) the imaged spray fan(s). Additionally, the controller 112 may be configured to analyze the received image data to determine the size of the droplets or particles forms the imaged spray fan(s). Furthermore, when multiple spray fans are imaged, the controller 112 may be configured to analyze the received image data to identify any inconsistencies in the identified shapes and/or sizes of the spray fans.”).
Harmon does not teach but Anderson teaches, wherein the first command lowers a boom to a boom height relative to a field above a defined height; (See Anderson paragraph 0129; “Boom position subsystem 1324 is configured to controllably adjust the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) or otherwise actuate movement of boom 210, including individual boom arms 212 and 214. For example, boom position subsystem 1324 can include a number of actuators (such as electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical or electromechanical actuators, as well as numerous other types of actuators) that are coupled to various components to adjust a position or orientation of boom 210 or individual boom arms 212 and 214. For instance, upon the detection of an upcoming change in crop height (e.g., detection of crop height increasing ahead of boom 210), action signals can be provided to boom position subsystem 1324 to adjust the position of boom 210 or boom arms 212 or 214 relative to agricultural surface 206, such that boom 210 will remain at a desired position relative to the crop canopy.”)
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Anderson first command raises a boom, it would be obvious to modify Harmon agricultural applicator with Anderson boom height change. Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding the command to adjust the boom height will allow more accurate and uniform application; No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding boom height change. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 7 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor taches the method of claim 5, Harmon does not teach but Taylor teaches, further comprising: generating, with the computing system, a notification when the second command is generated; (See Harmon paragraph 0037; “Furthermore, in one embodiment, the system 100 may also include a user interface 120. More specifically, the user interface 120 may be configured to configured to receive user inputs from the operator (e.g., inputs associated with a predetermined range for the spray quality parameter(s)) to the operator of the sprayer/vehicle 10/12. As such, the user interface 120 may include the may include one or more input devices (not shown), such as touchscreens, keypads, touchpads, knobs, buttons, sliders, switches, mice, microphones, and/or the like, which are configured to receive user inputs from the operator. The user interface 120 may, in turn, be communicatively coupled to the controller 112 via the communicative link 118 to permit the inputs to be transmitted from the user interface 120 to the controller 112. In addition, some embodiments of the user interface 120 may include one or more feedback devices (not shown), such as display screens, speakers, warning lights, and/or the like, which are configured to provide feedback from the controller 112 to the operator. In one embodiment, the user interface 120 may be mounted or otherwise positioned within a cab of the vehicle 12. However, in alternative embodiments, the user interface 120 may mounted at any other suitable location.”).
Regarding claim 8 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the method of claim 7, Harmon does not teach but Taylor teaches, further comprising: presenting, with a user interface, the notification on a display; (See Harmon paragraph 0037; “Furthermore, in one embodiment, the system 100 may also include a user interface 120. More specifically, the user interface 120 may be configured to configured to receive user inputs from the operator (e.g., inputs associated with a predetermined range for the spray quality parameter(s)) to the operator of the sprayer/vehicle 10/12. As such, the user interface 120 may include the may include one or more input devices (not shown), such as touchscreens, keypads, touchpads, knobs, buttons, sliders, switches, mice, microphones, and/or the like, which are configured to receive user inputs from the operator. The user interface 120 may, in turn, be communicatively coupled to the controller 112 via the communicative link 118 to permit the inputs to be transmitted from the user interface 120 to the controller 112. In addition, some embodiments of the user interface 120 may include one or more feedback devices (not shown), such as display screens, speakers, warning lights, and/or the like, which are configured to provide feedback from the controller 112 to the operator. In one embodiment, the user interface 120 may be mounted or otherwise positioned within a cab of the vehicle 12. However, in alternative embodiments, the user interface 120 may mounted at any other suitable location.”).
Regarding claim 9 Harmon teaches an agricultural system comprising: a product application system including one or more nozzle assemblies; a sensing system configured to capture data indicative of a condition of a spray operation; (See Harmon paragraph 0016 and 0027; “…systems and methods for controlling the ground speed of an agricultural sprayer… In accordance with aspects of the present subject matter, one or more spray quality sensors 102 may be installed on the sprayer 10 and/or the vehicle 12. In general, the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may be configured to capture data indicative of one or more spray quality parameters associated with the fans 56 of the agricultural fluid being dispensed by the nozzles 36. The spray quality parameter(s) may, in turn, be indicative of the quality of the spraying operation, such as whether a target application rate of the agricultural substance is being met. As will be described below, a controller may be configured to control the ground speed of the sprayer 10 based on the captured data.”); an input device configured to receive a first command to alter an application parameter for an agricultural product to be exhausted from a nozzle assembly; (See Harmon paragraph 0037 and 0040; “the system 100 may also include a user interface 120. More specifically, the user interface 120 may be configured to configured to receive user inputs from the operator (e.g., inputs associated with a predetermined range for the spray quality parameter(s)) to the operator of the sprayer/vehicle 10/12. As such, the user interface 120 may include the may include one or more input devices (not shown), such as touchscreens, keypads, touchpads, knobs, buttons, sliders, switches, mice, microphones, and/or the like, which are configured to receive user inputs from the operator. The user interface 120 may, in turn, be communicatively coupled to the controller 112 via the communicative link 118 to permit the inputs to be transmitted from the user interface 120 to the controller 112… determined spray quality parameter(s) may correspond to any suitable parameter(s)/characteristic(s) indicative of the quality of the spray fans being dispensed by the nozzles.”); and a computing system communicatively coupled to the product application system, the sensing system, and the input device, the computing system being configured to receive the first command to alter the application parameter; alter a first component based on the first command;(See Harmon paragraph 0045-0047; “As shown in FIG. 4, at (202), the method 200 may include receiving, with one or more computing devices, sensor data indicative of a spray quality parameter associated with a dispensed fan of an agricultural fluid. For instance, as described above, the controller 112 may be configured to receive data from one or more spray quality sensors 102. Such data may, in turn, be indicative of one or more spray quality parameter associated with one or more fans of an agricultural fluid being dispensed by an agricultural sprayer 10.
Additionally, at (204), the method 200 may include determining, with the one or more computing devices, the spray quality parameter based on the received sensor data. For instance, as described above, the controller 112 may be configured to determine the spray quality parameter(s) based on the received sensor data.
Moreover, as shown in FIG. 4, at (206), the method 200 may include controlling, with one or more computing devices, the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter. For instance, as described above, the controller 112 may be configured to adjust the operation of the engine 22, the transmission 24, and/or the braking actuator(s) 26 of the sprayer 10 or the work vehicle 12 to control the ground speed of the sprayer 10 based on the determined spray quality parameter(s).”);determine whether the condition of the spray operation deviates from a defined condition range in response to altering the first component; (See Harmon paragraph 0017; “…the controller may be configured to control the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter. For example, in one embodiment, the controller may be configured to compare the determined spray quality parameter to a predetermined parameter range. Thereafter, when the determined spray quality parameter falls outside of the predetermined parameter range (thereby indicating the agricultural substance is not being applied at the target application rate and/or the spray quality has degraded), the controller may be configured to initiate a reduction in the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer until the spray quality parameter is returned to the predetermined parameter range.”); and generate a second command to alter a second component based on a prediction that the alteration of the first component will cause the condition of the spray operation to deviate from the defined condition range; (See Harmon paragraph 0018; “Controlling the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter may ensure that the target application rate of the agricultural substance and/or the desired spray quality is maintained as sprayer travels across the field and field conditions change. In this respect, controlling the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter may improve agricultural outcomes.”).
Harmon does not teach but Anderson teaches, wherein the second command is generated prior to the sensing system detecting the deviation from the defined condition range; (See Anderson paragraph 0073; “In another example, washouts, ruts, drifts, rills, gullies, erosion, material/sediment deposit or build-up (e.g., ridges, soil drift, etc.), among various other conditions, can be present on the field due to the anomalies and/or events that occur in the passage of time between conducting the survey or previous operation (or both) and the operation to be conducted on the field. These changes in the topography of the field may not be represented in a topographic map provided to the operator (or the control system) of the agricultural machine that is based on data collected prior to the occurrence of the anomalies and/or events. Thus, the machine settings and other operating parameters commanded by the operator (or the control system) based on these agricultural characteristic maps can lead to error or other deviation in the performance of the agricultural machines.”).
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural vehicle operation with Taylor first and second commands to alter the condition of the components. Harmon includes sensors and controller to add additional alteration commands, so it would be obvious to modify Harmon with Anderson command prior to detecting the deviation. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding command prior to detecting the deviation which would allow better control of the agricultural applicator by adding the detection of the deviation to the Harmon agricultural vehicle control device. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Harmon does not teach but Taylor teaches, and alter the second component based on the second command before alerting the first component based on the first command; (See Taylor column 5, line 47-63; “; “For example, it is noted in FIG. 3 that the screen shows a speed setting. The speed setting includes both a toggle button 44 and an increment button 46. When the toggle button has been set at the auto selection, the user display unit 10 will communicate to the planter to automatically adjust its speed based on an additional setting, such as the speed of the tow vehicle pulling or towing the planter. However, the selection can be switched to manual, wherein the speed can be incrementally changed, such as changing the speed or population of the row units of the planter to vary based upon the user input. Therefore, while two miles per hour shown as the speed, the increment button can be increased by the tenth or whole units to adjust the speed of the tow vehicle, towed vehicle, or some combination thereof. Therefore, the inclusion of the toggle and increment buttons provides for numerous adjustments for both the tow unit and/or towed vehicle or implement via the display unit 10.”).
Harmon and Taylor are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Taylor first and second commands to alter the condition of the components. Harmon includes sensors and controller to add additional alteration commands, so it would be obvious to modify Harmon with Taylor commands for components alteration and its order. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding commands for components alteration and its order which would allow better control of the agricultural applicator. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 10 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the system of claim 9, Harmon also teaches, wherein the sensing system comprises: a flow sensor configured to capture data indicative of a flow condition within the product application system; (See Harmon paragraph 0027 and 0030-0031; “…one or more spray quality sensors 102 may be installed on the sprayer 10 and/or the vehicle 12. In general, the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may be configured to capture data indicative of one or more spray quality parameters associated with the fans 56 of the agricultural fluid being dispensed by the nozzles 36. The spray quality parameter(s) may, in turn, be indicative of the quality of the spraying operation, such as whether a target application rate of the agricultural substance is being met. As will be described below, a controller may be configured to control the ground speed of the sprayer 10 based on the captured data… the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may correspond to one or more pressure sensors 108. In general, the pressure sensor(s) 108 may be configured to capture data indicative of the pressure of the agricultural substance being supplied to the nozzles 36. As such, the pressure sensor(s) 108 may be provided in fluid communication with one of the fluid conduits 58. For example, the pressure sensor 108 may correspond to a diaphragm pressure sensor, a piston pressure sensor, a strain gauge-based pressure sensor, an electromagnetic pressure sensor, and/or the like.
In a further embodiment, the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may correspond to one or more airspeed sensors 110. In general, the airspeed sensor(s) 110 may be configured to capture data indicative of the airspeed of the air flowing past the boom assembly 40 as the sprayer 10 travels in the direction of travel 14. The airspeed data may, in turn, be indicative of the speed at which the air moves relative the boom assembly 40. In this respect, airspeed data may take in account both the airflow caused by the movement of the sprayer 10 relative to the ground and the airflow caused by any wind that is present. For example, the airspeed sensor(s) 110 may correspond to a pitot tube, an anemometer, and/or the like. As shown, the airspeed sensor(s) 110 are mounted on the top of the boom assembly 40. However, in alternative embodiments, the airspeed sensor(s) 110 may be installed on the sprayer 10 at any other suitable location(s). Moreover, in further embodiments, the spray quality sensor(s) 102 may correspond to any other suitable sensor(s) capable of capturing data indicative of the quality of the spray fans 56 emitted by the nozzles 36.”).
Harmon does not teach but Anderson teaches, and a position sensor operably coupled with a boom assembly operably supporting the one or more nozzle assemblies and configured to capture indicative of a boom position relative to a field; (See Anderson paragraph 0119; “Position sensors 1344 are configured to sense position information relative to various components of mobile machine 100. For example, a number of position sensors 1344 can be disposed at various locations within mobile machine 100. They can thus detect a position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) of the various components of mobile machine 100, such as the height of header 104 or boom 210 (or boom arms 212 and 214) above the worksite, the height or orientation of nozzles 208, as well as position information relative to various other components. Position sensors 1344 can be configured to sense position information of the various components of mobile machine 100 relative to any number of items, such as position information relative to the worksite surface, position information relative to other components of mobile machine 100, as well as a variety of other items. For instance, position sensors 1344 can sense the height of header 104, boom 210 or spray nozzle(s) 208 from a detected top of vegetation on the worksite surface. In another example, the position and orientation of other items can be calculated, based on a sensor signal, by knowing the dimensions of the mobile machine 100.”).
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Anderson first command raises a boom, it would be obvious to modify Harmon agricultural applicator with Anderson boom height change. Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding the command to adjust the boom height will allow more accurate and uniform application; No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding boom height change. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 11 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the system of claim 10, Harmon further teaches wherein the second command is determined and provided to the second component through closed-loop control; (See Harmon Abstract that describes the close-loop control system; “A system for controlling a ground speed of an agricultural sprayer includes a boom and a nozzle mounted on the boom. The nozzle, in turn, is configured to dispense a fan of an agricultural fluid as the agricultural sprayer travels across the field. Additionally, the system includes a sensor configured to capture data indicative of a spray quality parameter associated with the dispensed fan of the agricultural fluid. Furthermore, the system includes a controller communicatively coupled to the sensor. As such, the controller is configured to receive the captured data from the sensor as the agricultural sprayer travels across the field. Moreover, the controller is configured to determine the spray quality parameter based on the received data. In addition, the controller is configured to control a ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter.”).
Regarding claim 12 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the system of claim 11, Harmon does not teach but Taylor teaches, wherein the computing system is further configured to: generate a notification based on the generation of the second command; (See Taylor column 7, line 32-47; “FIG. 12 shows addition setup for a task. The figure shows the information that has been input thus far. Furthermore, a popup screen is shown overlaying the main screen, and provides an ALERT based upon the selections made for the task. The operator can read the information of the alert and can dismiss the same by interacting with the OK button. However, this information could cause the operation to go back and make a change or confirmation as to the setup selections made thus far. As will be understood, this type of alert is tiered such that it is simply providing information, and does not require any changes to be made. The alert can simply be dismissed. However, if everything looks acceptable, the PLANT button at the right of the screen can be selected to begin planting of the field with the seed type and other selections made. A cancellation button, in the form of an X, could also be chosen to start over.”).
Harmon and Taylor are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural vehicle operation with Taylor first and second commands to alter the condition of the components. Harmon includes sensors and controller to add additional alteration commands, so it would be obvious to modify Harmon with Taylor notification based on the generation of the second command. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding notification based on the generation of the second command which would allow better control of the Harmon agricultural vehicle control device. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 13 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the system of claim 12, Harmon does not teach but Taylor teaches, wherein the computing system is further configured to: present the notification on a display with a user interface; (See Harmon paragraph 0037; “Furthermore, in one embodiment, the system 100 may also include a user interface 120. More specifically, the user interface 120 may be configured to configured to receive user inputs from the operator (e.g., inputs associated with a predetermined range for the spray quality parameter(s)) to the operator of the sprayer/vehicle 10/12. As such, the user interface 120 may include the may include one or more input devices (not shown), such as touchscreens, keypads, touchpads, knobs, buttons, sliders, switches, mice, microphones, and/or the like, which are configured to receive user inputs from the operator. The user interface 120 may, in turn, be communicatively coupled to the controller 112 via the communicative link 118 to permit the inputs to be transmitted from the user interface 120 to the controller 112. In addition, some embodiments of the user interface 120 may include one or more feedback devices (not shown), such as display screens, speakers, warning lights, and/or the like, which are configured to provide feedback from the controller 112 to the operator. In one embodiment, the user interface 120 may be mounted or otherwise positioned within a cab of the vehicle 12. However, in alternative embodiments, the user interface 120 may mounted at any other suitable location.”).
With respect to independent claim 14 please see the rejection above with respect to claim 3 which is commensurate in scope to claim 14, with claim 3 being drown to method, and claim 14 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding claim 15 Harmon in view of Anderson and Taylor teaches the system of claim 9, Harmon does not teach but Taylor teaches, wherein the first command is a change in speed of a vehicle operably coupled with the application system; (See Taylor column 5, line 63; “FIG. 3 that the screen shows a speed setting. The speed setting includes both a toggle button 44 and an increment button 46. When the toggle button has been set at the auto selection, the user display unit 10 will communicate to the planter to automatically adjust its speed based on an additional setting, such as the speed of the tow vehicle pulling or towing the planter. However, the selection can be switched to manual, wherein the speed can be incrementally changed, such as changing the speed or population of the row units of the planter to vary based upon the user input. Therefore, while two miles per hour shown as the speed, the increment button can be increased by the tenth or whole units to adjust the speed of the tow vehicle, towed vehicle, or some combination thereof. Therefore, the inclusion of the toggle and increment buttons provides for numerous adjustments for both the tow unit and/or towed vehicle or implement via the display unit 10.”).
Harmon and Taylor are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Taylor first and second commands to alter the condition of the components. Harmon includes sensors and controller to add additional alteration commands, so it would be obvious to modify Harmon with Taylor commands for components alteration and its order. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding commands for components alteration and its order which would allow better control of the agricultural applicator. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Harmon does not teach but Anderson teaches, and wherein the second command is an alteration of the one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle range based at least in part on the first command; (See Anderson paragraph 0098; “The operation of the fluid conveyance system is adjustable, such as automatically or manually, to vary a pressure, a flow rate of liquid, as well as various other fluid characteristics of spraying system 202. Spray nozzles 208 are coupled to and spaced apart along boom 210. In one example, the operation and position of spray nozzles 208 can be adjusted, such as automatically, semi-automatically, or manually. For example, the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) of nozzles 208 can be adjusted, as well as the volume or flow rate of liquid passing through nozzles 208 (such as by operation of a controllable valve) ...”; also see Anderson paragraph 0101; “A In operation, and by way of overview, the height of boom 210 (or arms 212 and 214) are set and sprayer 201 moves over field 206 in the direction indicated by arrow 246. As it moves, substance is conveyed from tank 204 through conduits in boom 210 and to and through nozzles 208 to be applied to vegetation on field 206. The application of substance on field 206 can be controllably adjusted. For example, but not by limitation, by varying the height of boom 210 (or arms 212 and 214) off of field 206, varying the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) of nozzles 208, varying the flow characteristics of the substance through the spraying system, etc.”).
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Anderson second command to alter one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle. Harmon includes sensors and controller to add additional alteration commands, so it would be obvious to modify Harmon with Anderson second command to alter one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding second command to alter one or more nozzle assemblies to operate within a defined duty cycle. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harmon (Patent No. US20210252541A1) in view of Anderson (Patent No. US20220132723A1) and Dumont (Patent No. US12035706B2).
Regarding claim 16 Harmon teaches a method for an agricultural application operation, the method comprising: receiving, through an input device; (See Harmon paragraph 0044; “…method 200 for controlling the ground speed of an agricultural sprayer… “);
determining, with a computing system, if a condition of a spray operation deviates from a defined condition range in response to moving the boom to the second height;(See Harmon paragraph 0017; “…the controller may be configured to control the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter. For example, in one embodiment, the controller may be configured to compare the determined spray quality parameter to a predetermined parameter range. Thereafter, when the determined spray quality parameter falls outside of the predetermined parameter range (thereby indicating the agricultural substance is not being applied at the target application rate and/or the spray quality has degraded), the controller may be configured to initiate a reduction in the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer until the spray quality parameter is returned to the predetermined parameter range.”);
and generating, with the computing system, a second command to alter a component based in part on the condition of the spray operation deviating from the defined condition range prior to the boom being placed at the second height; (See Harmon paragraph 0017-0018; “…For example, in one embodiment, the controller may be configured to compare the determined spray quality parameter to a predetermined parameter range. Thereafter, when the determined spray quality parameter falls outside of the predetermined parameter range (thereby indicating the agricultural substance is not being applied at the target application rate and/or the spray quality has degraded), the controller may be configured to initiate a reduction in the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer until the spray quality parameter is returned to the predetermined parameter range. Controlling the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter may ensure that the target application rate of the agricultural substance and/or the desired spray quality is maintained as sprayer travels across the field and field conditions change. In this respect, controlling the ground speed of the agricultural sprayer based on the determined spray quality parameter may improve agricultural outcomes.”).
Harmon does not explicitly teach but Anderson teaches, by calculating an expected value of the condition based on the second height defined by the first command; (See Anderson paragraph 0119; “Position sensors 1344 are configured to sense position information relative to various components of mobile machine 100. For example, a number of position sensors 1344 can be disposed at various locations within mobile machine 100. They can thus detect a position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) of the various components of mobile machine 100, such as the height of header 104 or boom 210 (or boom arms 212 and 214) above the worksite, the height or orientation of nozzles 208, as well as position information relative to various other components. Position sensors 1344 can be configured to sense position information of the various components of mobile machine 100 relative to any number of items, such as position information relative to the worksite surface, position information relative to other components of mobile machine 100, as well as a variety of other items. For instance, position sensors 1344 can sense the height of header 104, boom 210 or spray nozzle(s) 208 from a detected top of vegetation on the worksite surface. In another example, the position and orientation of other items can be calculated, based on a sensor signal, by knowing the dimensions of the mobile machine 100.”); a first command to alter a boom from a first height to a second height relative to a field moving, with a suspension system, the boom to the second height; (See Anderson paragraph 0129; “Boom position subsystem 1324 is configured to controllably adjust the position (e.g., height, orientation, tilt, etc.) or otherwise actuate movement of boom 210, including individual boom arms 212 and 214. For example, boom position subsystem 1324 can include a number of actuators (such as electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical or electromechanical actuators, as well as numerous other types of actuators) that are coupled to various components to adjust a position or orientation of boom 210 or individual boom arms 212 and 214. For instance, upon the detection of an upcoming change in crop height (e.g., detection of crop height increasing ahead of boom 210), action signals can be provided to boom position subsystem 1324 to adjust the position of boom 210 or boom arms 212 or 214 relative to agricultural surface 206, such that boom 210 will remain at a desired position relative to the crop canopy.”)
Harmon and Anderson are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Anderson first command raises a boom, it would be obvious to modify Harmon agricultural applicator with Anderson boom height change. Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding the command to adjust the boom height will allow more accurate and uniform application; No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding boom height change. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Harmon does not teach but Dumont teaches, wherein the suspension system is a vehicle suspension configured to alter a position of a vehicle chassis relative to the field and maintain a defined orientation of the boom relative to the chassis at the first height and the second height; (See Dumont column 5, line 11-23; “The height-adjustable linkage 108 in the illustrated embodiment is of a known construction and comprises a pair of spaced vertical rails fixed to the chassis 12 and upon which the boom support frame 132 is slideably mounted for height adjustment thereof. In an alternative embodiment, (not illustrated) the boom support frame is instead mounted to the chassis by a four-bar parallel link arrangement, which permits raising and lowering of the boom with respect to the chassis.
A hoist actuator 181 (shown in FIG. 3) in the form of a hydraulic cylinder for example, is configured to raise and lower the boom support frame with respect to the chassis 12.”).
Harmon and Dumont are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Dumont altering a position of a vehicle chassis relative to the field. Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding the command to adjust the boom height will allow more accurate and uniform application will allow more accurate and uniform application. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding altering a position of a vehicle chassis relative to the field. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 18 Harmon in view of Anderson and Dumont teaches the method of claim 16, Harmon does not teach but Dumont teaches, further comprising: altering a boom suspension configured to alter a position of a boom relative to the vehicle chassis; (See Dumont column 5, line 11-23; “The height-adjustable linkage 108 in the illustrated embodiment is of a known construction and comprises a pair of spaced vertical rails fixed to the chassis 12 and upon which the boom support frame 132 is slideably mounted for height adjustment thereof. In an alternative embodiment, (not illustrated) the boom support frame is instead mounted to the chassis by a four-bar parallel link arrangement, which permits raising and lowering of the boom with respect to the chassis.
A hoist actuator 181 (shown in FIG. 3) in the form of a hydraulic cylinder for example, is configured to raise and lower the boom support frame with respect to the chassis 12.”).
Harmon and Dumont are in the same field of endeavor of system and method of an agricultural applicator. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Harmon agricultural application operation with Dumont altering a position of a vehicle chassis relative to the field. Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding Harmon already control the movement of the arms adding the command to adjust the boom height will allow more accurate and uniform application will allow more accurate and uniform application. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Harmon by adding altering a position of a vehicle chassis relative to the field. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 19 Harmon in view of Anderson and Dumont teaches the method of claim 16, Harmon does not teach but Taylor teaches, further comprising: generating, with the computing system, a notification when the second command is generated; (See Harmon paragraph 0037; “Furthermore, in one embodiment, the system 100 may also include a user interface 120. More specifically, the user interface 120 may be configured to configured to receive user inputs from the operator (e.g., inputs associated with a predetermined range for the spray quality parameter(s)) to the operator of the sprayer/vehicle 10/12. As such, the user interface 120 may include the may include one or more input devices (not shown), such as touchscreens, keypads, touchpads, knobs, buttons, sliders, switches, mice, microphones, and/or the like, which are configured to receive user inputs from the operator. The user interface 120 may, in turn, be communicatively coupled to the controller 112 via the communicative link 118 to permit the inputs to be transmitted from the user interface 120 to the controller 112. In addition, some embodiments of the user interface 120 may include one or more feedback devices (not shown), such as display screens, speakers, warning lights, and/or the like, which are configured to provide feedback from the controller 112 to the operator. In one embodiment, the user interface 120 may be mounted or otherwise positioned within a cab of the vehicle 12. However, in alternative embodiments, the user interface 120 may mounted at any other suitable location.”).
Regarding claim 20 Harmon in view of Anderson and Dumont teaches the method of claim 19, Harmon does not teach but Harmon teaches further comprising: presenting, with a user interface, the notification on a display; (See Harmon paragraph 0037; “Furthermore, in one embodiment, the system 100 may also include a user interface 120. More specifically, the user interface 120 may be configured to configured to receive user inputs from the operator (e.g., inputs associated with a predetermined range for the spray quality parameter(s)) to the operator of the sprayer/vehicle 10/12. As such, the user interface 120 may include the may include one or more input devices (not shown), such as touchscreens, keypads, touchpads, knobs, buttons, sliders, switches, mice, microphones, and/or the like, which are configured to receive user inputs from the operator. The user interface 120 may, in turn, be communicatively coupled to the controller 112 via the communicative link 118 to permit the inputs to be transmitted from the user interface 120 to the controller 112. In addition, some embodiments of the user interface 120 may include one or more feedback devices (not shown), such as display screens, speakers, warning lights, and/or the like, which are configured to provide feedback from the controller 112 to the operator. In one embodiment, the user interface 120 may be mounted or otherwise positioned within a cab of the vehicle 12. However, in alternative embodiments, the user interface 120 may mounted at any other suitable location.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIDIA KWIATKOWSKA whose telephone number is (571)272-5161. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666