DETAILED ACTION
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 Final action is in reply to the application 18164592 amendment filed on 04/14/2026.
Claim 1 – 3, 10 – 11, 18 – 21 are amended
Claim 9 is cancelled
Claims 1 – 8, 10 – 21 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: It is unclear whether the amended claim “ a sensor to output…” is the same sensor as a first sensor , or a separate sensor that detects the presence of the operator. A first sensor also is detecting a sensed manual force in the controller step. Clarity regarding a first sensor and a sensor should be clarified. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to arguments
The examiner finds the applicants amendments of rolling up claim 9 into the independent claim 1 persuasive.
The examiner states that independent claim 10 is not persuasive, the examiner states that the specific amendments are still broad which are broadly interpreted by prior art MOLLICK and WHITNEY .
The examiner finds the applicants amendments of the elements of claim 9 into independent claim 18 persuasive.
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.
Claim(s) 10, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG Pub 20170290258 – Mollick et al. hereinafter as MOLLICK in view of US PG Pub 20210223771 – Whitney et al. hereinafter as WHITNEY
Regarding Claim 10
MOLLICK discloses:
10. (Currently Amended) A method for assisting an operator with manual positioning of a lower link of a three-point hitch, the method comprising:
sensing manual force applied to the lower link of a three-hitch the three-point hitch; ( para. 0338 – fig. 10 – wherein the position sensors cab used and wired to controller to assist in connection of the implements of adjusting alignment of the bottom and top links wherein manual force is interpreted to be an operator assist movement of lower linkages.)
applying an assist force to the lower link based upon the sensed manual force applied to the lower link of the three-point hitch. ( para. 00338 – wherein manual force applied to the lower link uses assist force)
MOLLICK discloses of three point hitch with assist and hook up operation based on user input, MOLLICK fails to disclose the sensor arrangement for it, WHITNEY discloses of lockout function for altering the operating condition of a vehicle for changing between operating states, WHITNEY further discloses:
entering a hookup assist mode based upon output of operator presence signals indicating presence of the operator proximate to machine( para. 0042 – wherein the sensor acknowledges of an operators presence for authorization)
in the hookup assist mode, enable vehicle function( para. 0042 – where in camera sensor detects whether an operator is present or authorized for providing the direct gestures of the controlling of vehicle.)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicants invention for MOLLICK’s three point hitch with assist and hook up operation based on user input to be able to utilize WHITNEY’s ability to use a lockout function for altering the operating condition of a vehicle for changing between operating states as taught by WHITNEY. This would allow MOLLICK to prevent unauthorized personal to operate the vehicle. ( para. 0066)
Regarding Claim 11
MOLLICK / WHITNEY discloses claim 10:
MOLLICK discloses:
sensing a second manual force applied to a second lower link of the three-hitch system; ( para. 0338 – fig. 10 – wherein the position sensors cab used and wired to controller to assist in connection of the implements of adjusting alignment of the bottom and top links wherein manual force is interpreted to be an operator assist movement of lower linkages.)
applying a second assist force to the second lower link based upon the second manual force applied to the second lower link of the three-point hitch.
MOLLICK discloses of three point hitch with assist, WHITNEY discloses of vehicle operator presence in order for operator to control the vehicle functions as disclosed in claim 10:
in the hookup assist mode, enable vehicle function( para. 0042 – where in camera sensor detects whether an operator is present or authorized for providing the direct gestures of the controlling of vehicle.)
Regarding Claim 17
17. (Original) The method of claim 10, wherein application of the assist force is at an operator selected frequency.( para. 0338 – fig. 10 – wherein the position sensors cab used and wired to controller to assist in connection of the implements of adjusting alignment of the bottom and top links wherein manual force is interpreted to be an operator assist movement of lower linkages. where in the assistance depends on the operator controlling the assistant force.)
Allowable subject matter
Claims 1 – 8, and 18 – 20 are allowable
Claims 12 – 16 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
While agricultural three point hitches are known ( MOLLICK / BECKMANN / WENDTE) such references do not disclose the specifics regarding the detail of a sensor to output operator presence signals indicating presence of an operator proximate to the lower link, wherein the controller is configured to apply the assist force in response to the vehicle being in a hookup assist mode and wherein the controller is configured to enter the hookup assist mode based upon operator presence signals.
Such a modification would require too significant of a redesign and would constitute an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFRED H TSUI whose telephone number is (571)272-9511. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Chris Sebesta can be reached on 5712720547. 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.
/A.H.T/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights