DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This final action is in response to Applicant’s filing of 02/12/2026.
Claims 1-4 and 6-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4 and 6-20 rejected under 35 USC § 103 have been considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that Figgins fails to teach "...one or more sensors identifying bale characteristics of the formed bale, the sensor array generating sensor data indicative of the identified bale characteristics ...
wherein the baler characteristics comprise baler pick-up height, and the baler adjustment data indicative of a height adjustment of the baler pick-up used to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale, …
... adjustment of the baler settings comprises adjusting the baler pick-up height." The Applicant asserts that this teaching represents a mischaracterization of the claimed invention and Figgins’ use as a reference to teach the limitations.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Figgins is not relied on to teach "...one or more sensors identifying bale characteristics of the formed bale, the sensor array generating sensor data indicative of the identified bale characteristics ...” as Smith is primarily used to disclose this feature (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing at least one operating condition sensor being used to determine bale conditions). Where Smith is deficient is in teaching “baler pick-up height” as a characteristic to adjust baler operations. Applicant’s specification ¶ [0029] expounds on this characteristic by disclosing: “As an example, an operator may determine that a specified bale characteristic is desired for a target crop, such as based on the type of crop, the crop conditions, the field conditions, type of equipment, and/or the weather conditions (present and future), desired use of bale. For example, as described above, the operator can preset the pickup height for the baler, which is loaded to the bale settings 406. During operation, the sensors 418 may detect a low mass flow of the incoming crop and the bale settings algorithm can use the sensor data 424 to adjust the pickup height to meet desired bale setting 406 for bale density 412, bale shape 408, and/or bale size 410, based on ground speed and site conditions….” (emphasis added). To this end, without reading the specification into the claims, Figgins ¶ [0020-0024] suggests these limitations:
“In known feeding assemblies that pickup crop material, the distance between the pickup reel, as defined at the rotation axis, and the auger is fixed. While the fixed distance between the pickup reel and the auger may be well-suited for certain crop conditions and/or characteristics, such as long-stranded crops, the distance may not be optimal for different crop conditions and/or characteristics, such as short-stranded crops. When collecting short-stranded crops, for example, the distance between the pickup reel and the auger may be so great that the crop material is not properly fed to the auger by the tines, which can create a stagnant zone where there is no crop movement. On the other hand, when collecting long-stranded crops the distance may be so small that the crop is damaged during the transfer between the tines and the auger. …. To address some of the previously described issues, and referring now to FIGS. 2-3 as well, the pickup reel 30 provided according to the present disclosure is movable relative to the auger 32 such that movement of the pickup reel 30 adjusts a distance between the rotation axis RA of the pickup reel 30 and at least one flighting 34 of the auger 32. By moving the pickup reel 30, the distance between the pickup reel 30 and the auger 32 can be adjusted to improve collection of crop material based on the crop conditions and/or characteristics. …. In some exemplary embodiments, and referring now to FIG. 4, the pickup reel 30 is linearly movably coupled to the frame 33 via direct connection of the arm 211 to the pickup actuator 220, i.e., the linkage bars 212 may be omitted. … In some embodiments, the brace 411 is selectively movable in the vertical direction V so the height of the pickup reel 30 can also be adjusted.”
In other words, Figgins directly speaks to adjusting a pickup reel’s position, including its height, to accommodate crop characteristics and improve yield volume and quality. Figgins ¶ [0030-0031] also include average length of cut crop, average density of cut crop, type of crop material, and moisture content of cut crop material as one or more characteristics when determining the adjustment distance. Therefore, it suggests the missing limitations and is reasonable to combine with Smith both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help the baler with different crop yield densities to produce consistent bales.
Further in this regard and in response to applicant's arguments against Figgins individually, Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
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.
Claims 1, 4, 9-11, 13, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 20220192098 A1; reference provided in Applicant’s IDS disclosure and corroborated with European Search Opinion) in view of Figgins et al. (US 20210267127 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Smith discloses a system for adjusting baler system settings during operation (see at least abstract and ¶ [0001]), comprising:
a baler that collects a target crop and forms a bale from the collected crop (see at least ¶ [0017-0018] disclosing picking up crop material and forming bales);
a sensor array comprising one or more sensors, the one or more sensors identifying bale characteristics of the formed bale, the sensor array generating sensor data indicative of the identified bale characteristics (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing at least one operating condition sensor being used to determine bale conditions);
a baler controller generating baler adjustment data indicative of one or more baler system adjustments, the baler adjustment data generated based at least on the sensor data and a pre-determined threshold for one or more of the bale characteristics (see at least ¶ [0022-0023] disclosing a controller that receives operating condition data related to the bales and adjusts operating condition values based on the data and bale thresholds);
and one or more actuators that adjust baler settings in the baler based at least on the baler adjustment data (see at least ¶ [0023] and [0026] disclosing the adjustments include moving actuators in the baler frame and tailgate).
Smith does not disclose the baler characteristics comprising baler pick-up height, and the baler adjustment data indicative of a height adjustment of the baler pick-up used to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale,
wherein the adjustment of the baler settings comprises adjusting the baler pick-up height.
However, Figgins suggests the baler characteristics comprising baler pick-up height, and the baler adjustment data indicative of a height adjustment of the baler pick-up used to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0021-0024] and [0030-0031] disclosing a baler’s pickup reel height being adjusted according to crop characteristics, including density),
wherein the adjustment of the baler settings comprises adjusting the baler pick-up height (see at least ¶ [0021-0024] and [0030-0031] disclosing a baler’s pickup reel height being adjusted according to crop characteristics, including density).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate adjusting the pick-up height as described in Figgins into the baler of Smith with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help the baler with different crop yield densities to produce consistent bales.
Regarding claim 4, Smith discloses the baler adjustment data automatically generated by the baler controller based on the sensor data and the pre-determined threshold, and the baler adjustment data automatically provided to the one or more actuators to adjust the baler settings in real-time (see at least ¶ [0022-0023] and [0026] disclosing a controller that receives operating condition data related to the bales and adjusts operating condition values based on the data and bale thresholds and responds by moving actuators in the baler frame and tailgate).
Regarding claim 9, Smith discloses the baler characteristics comprising bale density, and the baler adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to a compression setting in the baler settings to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0019-0020] and [0024] disclosing monitoring and adjusting bale density by adjusting compression of the bale).
Regarding claim 10, Smith discloses the baler characteristics comprising a bale wrap characteristic or twine control characteristic, and the adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to an amount of wrap and/or wrap pressure setting, or an adjustment to twine control setting in the baler settings to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0021] and [0028] where wrapping with mesh or twine are connected to the bale’s predetermined threshold size and adjusts the density or speed the wrapping occurs).
Regarding claim 11, Smith discloses the one or more sensors in the sensor array comprising one or more of:
a mass flow sensor, a moisture sensor, load sensor, and direction sensor (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing operation condition sensors measuring incoming crop flow, bale moisture content, bale weight, bale size, and/or bale density), and the sensor data used to determine one or more of:
bale or flake size, bale density, bale shape (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing operation condition sensors measuring incoming crop flow, bale moisture content, bale weight, bale size, and/or bale density).
Regarding claim 13, Smith discloses a method of adjusting baler system settings during operation of a baler that collects a target crop and forms a bale from the collected crop (see at least abstract and ¶ [0001] and [0017-0018] disclosing automatically adjusting the operation of a baler picking up crop material and forming bales), the method comprising:
identifying bale characteristics of the formed bale using one or more of a sensor array, and generating sensor data indicative of the identified bale characteristics (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing at least one operating condition sensor being used to determine bale conditions);
generating baler adjustment data indicative of one or more baler system adjustments using a baler controller, where the baler adjustment data is generated based at least on the sensor data and a pre-determined threshold for one or more of the bale characteristics (see at least ¶ [0022-0023] disclosing a controller that receives operating condition data related to the bales and adjusts operating condition values based on the data and bale thresholds);
and adjusting baler settings in the baler using one or more actuators based at least on the baler adjustment data (see at least ¶ [0023] and [0026] disclosing the adjustments include moving actuators in the baler frame and tailgate).
Smith does not disclose the baler adjustment data is indicative of a height adjustment of the baler pick-up used to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale,
wherein the adjustment of the baler settings comprises adjusting the baler pick-up height.
However, Figgins suggests the baler adjustment data is indicative of a height adjustment of the baler pick-up used to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0021-0024] and [0030-0031] disclosing a baler’s pickup reel height being adjusted according to crop characteristics, including density),
wherein the adjustment of the baler settings comprises adjusting the baler pick-up height (see at least ¶ [0021-0024] and [0030-0031] disclosing a baler’s pickup reel height being adjusted according to crop characteristics, including density).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate adjusting the pick-up height as described in Figgins into the baler of Smith with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help the baler with different crop yield densities to produce consistent bales.
Regarding claim 16, Smith discloses automatically generating the baler adjustment data using the baler controller based on the sensor data and the pre-determined threshold, and automatically providing baler adjustment data to the one or more actuators to adjust the baler settings in real-time (see at least ¶ [0022-0023] and [0026] disclosing a controller that receives operating condition data related to the bales and adjusts operating condition values based on the data and bale thresholds and responds by moving actuators in the baler frame and tailgate).
Regarding claim 19, Smith discloses adjusting the baler settings that adjust a compression setting in the baler settings to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale using baler adjustment data, where the baler characteristics comprise bale density (see at least ¶ [0019-0020] and [0024] disclosing monitoring and adjusting bale density by adjusting compression of the bale).
Claims 2-3, 6-8, 14-15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. in view of Figgins et al., as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and in further view of Verhaeghe et al. (US 20130008324 A1; reference provided in Applicant’s IDS disclosure and corroborated with European Search Opinion).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not disclose a user interface configured to display identified bale characteristics;
a pre-determined threshold for respective bale characteristics;
and baler adjustment settings indicative of baler adjustment data.
However, Verhaeghe teaches a user interface configured to display identified bale characteristics (see at least abstract and ¶ [0038] and [0071-0073] disclosing a baler display providing operating parameters and measurements and compares them to optimized values);
a pre-determined threshold for respective bale characteristics (see at least abstract and ¶ [0038] and [0071-0073] disclosing a baler display providing operating parameters and measurements and compares them to optimized values, including parameters for forming bales);
and baler adjustment settings indicative of baler adjustment data (see at least ¶ [0051] and [0071-0072] disclosing the display presenting operating parameter settings that allows an operator to modify the settings).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the display interface of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would provide a person supervising the operation of the bale a means of controlling the operation settings to further optimize forming the bales.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not disclose the user interface configured to receive user input indicative of baler adjustment settings.
However, Verhaeghe teaches the user interface configured to receive user input indicative of baler adjustment settings (see at least ¶ [0051] and [0071-0072] disclosing the display presenting operating parameter settings that allows an operator to modify the settings).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the display interface of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would provide a person supervising the operation of the bale a means of controlling the operation settings to further optimize forming the bales.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not explicitly disclose the baler characteristics comprising bale size and/or bale flake size, and the baler adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to the baler settings that adjust a flake width of the bale and/or a width of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale.
However, Verhaeghe teaches the baler characteristics comprising bale size and/or bale flake size, and the baler adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to the baler settings that adjust a flake width of the bale and/or a width of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0073] disclosing shaping the bale into a predetermined length, width, and height, with measurement settings able to be adjusted to meet desired dimensions).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the bale shaping settings of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help maintain a consistent form for the bales as the crop is being processed while also allowing an operator to adjust the dimensions to desired settings.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not explicitly disclose the baler characteristics comprising bale shape, and the baler adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to the baler settings that adjust a shape of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale.
However, Verhaeghe teaches the baler characteristics comprising bale shape, and the baler adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to the baler settings that adjust a shape of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0073] disclosing shaping the bale into a predetermined length, width, and height, with measurement settings able to be adjusted to meet desired dimensions).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the bale shaping settings of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help maintain a consistent form for the bales as the crop is being processed while also allowing an operator to adjust the dimensions to desired settings.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not explicitly disclose the adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to a path of the baler to adjust the shape of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale.
However, Verhaeghe teaches the adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to a path of the baler to adjust the shape of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0073] disclosing shaping the bale into a predetermined length, width, and height, with measurement settings able to be adjusted to meet desired dimensions).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the bale shaping settings of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help maintain a consistent form for the bales as the crop is being processed while also allowing an operator to adjust the dimensions to desired settings.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not disclose displaying, on a user interface, identified bale characteristics, a pre-determined threshold for respective bale characteristics, and/or baler adjustment settings indicative of baler adjustment data.
However, Verhaeghe teaches displaying, on a user interface, identified bale characteristics, a pre-determined threshold for respective bale characteristics, and/or baler adjustment settings indicative of baler adjustment data (see at least ¶ [0051] and [0071-0073] disclosing a baler display providing operating parameters and measurements and compares them to optimized values, and presents operating parameter settings that allows an operator to modify the settings).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the display interface of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would provide a person supervising the operation of the bale a means of controlling the operation settings to further optimize forming the bales.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not disclose inputting, on a user interface, user input indicative of baler adjustment settings and/or pre-determined threshold(s).
However, Verhaeghe teaches inputting, on a user interface, user input indicative of baler adjustment settings and/or pre-determined threshold(s) (see at least ¶ [0051] and [0071-0073] disclosing a baler display providing operating parameters and measurements and compares them to optimized values, and presents operating parameter settings that allows an operator to modify the settings).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the display interface of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would provide a person supervising the operation of the bale a means of controlling the operation settings to further optimize forming the bales.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not explicitly disclose adjusting the baler settings that adjust a flake width of the bale and/or a width of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale using the baler adjustment data, where the baler characteristics comprise bale size and/or bale flake size.
However, Verhaeghe teaches adjusting the baler settings that adjust a flake width of the bale and/or a width of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale using the baler adjustment data, where the baler characteristics comprise bale size and/or bale flake size (see at least ¶ [0073] disclosing shaping the bale into a predetermined length, width, and height, with measurement settings able to be adjusted to meet desired dimensions).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the bale shaping settings of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help maintain a consistent form for the bales as the crop is being processed while also allowing an operator to adjust the dimensions to desired settings.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not explicitly disclose adjusting the baler settings that adjust a shape of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale using baler adjustment data, where the baler characteristics comprise bale shape.
However, Verhaeghe teaches adjusting the baler settings that adjust a shape of the bale to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale using baler adjustment data, where the baler characteristics comprise bale shape (see at least ¶ [0073] disclosing shaping the bale into a predetermined length, width, and height, with measurement settings able to be adjusted to meet desired dimensions).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the bale shaping settings of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help maintain a consistent form for the bales as the crop is being processed while also allowing an operator to adjust the dimensions to desired settings.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. in view of Figgins et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Nona et al. (US 20230032085 A1; reference provided in Applicant’s IDS disclosure and corroborated with European Search Opinion).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Smith and Figgins does not disclose the one or more sensors in the sensor array comprising an image sensor to image the bale as it is formed and/or after it is formed to identify the bale characteristics.
However, Nona teaches the one or more sensors in the sensor array comprising an image sensor to image the bale as it is formed and/or after it is formed to identify the bale characteristics (see at least ¶ [0029] disclosing the baler has cameras for gathering photo and/or video of bales and determining related information).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the image sensor of Nona into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would provide an additional source of information to verify bale parameters and baler operation to ensure proper bale formation.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 20220192098 A1) in view of Figgins et al. (US 20210267127 A1), Verhaeghe et al. (US 20130008324 A1), and Nona et al. (US 20230032085 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Smith discloses a system for adjusting baler system settings during operation (see at least abstract and ¶ [0001]), comprising:
a baler that collects a target crop and forms a bale from the collected crop (see at least ¶ [0017-0018] disclosing picking up crop material and forming bales);
a sensor array comprising one or more sensors, the one or more sensors identifying bale characteristics of the formed bale during forming or after formation, the sensor array generating sensor data indicative of the identified bale characteristics (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing at least one operating condition sensor being used to determine bale conditions), wherein the one or more sensors comprise one or more of:
a mass flow sensor (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing operation condition sensors measuring incoming crop flow);
a moisture sensor (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing operation condition sensors measuring bale moisture content);
load sensor (see at least ¶ [0025] disclosing operation condition sensors measuring bale weight);
and direction sensor;
a baler controller generating baler adjustment data indicative of one or more baler system adjustments, the baler adjustment data generated based at least on the sensor data and a pre-determined threshold for one or more of the bale characteristics, wherein the baler characteristics comprise bale density, bale size and/or flake size, bale shape, and bale wrap or twine control (see at least ¶ [0022-0023] disclosing a controller that receives operating condition data related to the bales’ size and adjusts operating condition values based on the data and bale thresholds);
and one or more actuators that adjust baler settings in the baler based at least on the baler adjustment data (see at least ¶ [0023] and [0026] disclosing the adjustments include moving actuators in the baler frame and tailgate).
Smith does not disclose the baler characteristics comprising baler pick-up height, and the baler adjustment data indicative of a height adjustment of the baler pick-up used to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale,
wherein the adjustment of the baler settings comprises adjusting the baler pick-up height.
However, Figgins suggests the baler characteristics comprising baler pick-up height, and the baler adjustment data indicative of a height adjustment of the baler pick-up used to meet the pre-determined threshold for the bale (see at least ¶ [0021-0024] and [0030-0031] disclosing a baler’s pickup reel height being adjusted according to crop characteristics, including density),
wherein the adjustment of the baler settings comprises adjusting the baler pick-up height (see at least ¶ [0021-0024] and [0030-0031] disclosing a baler’s pickup reel height being adjusted according to crop characteristics, including density).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate adjusting the pick-up height as described in Figgins into the baler of Smith with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would help the baler with different crop yield densities to produce consistent bales.
The combination of Smith and Figgins does not disclose a user interface configured to display identified bale characteristics, a pre-determined threshold for respective bale characteristics, and baler adjustment settings indicative of baler adjustment data, and configured to receive user input indicative of baler adjustment settings.
However, Verhaeghe teaches a user interface configured to display identified bale characteristics, a pre-determined threshold for respective bale characteristics, and baler adjustment settings indicative of baler adjustment data, and configured to receive user input indicative of baler adjustment settings (see at least ¶ [0051] and [0071-0073] disclosing a baler display providing operating parameters and measurements and compares them to optimized values, and presents operating parameter settings that allows an operator to modify the settings).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the display interface of Verhaeghe into the combination of Smith and Figgins with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would provide a person supervising the operation of the bale a means of controlling the operation settings to further optimize forming the bales.
The combination of Smith, Figgins, and Verhaeghe does not disclose an image sensor.
However, Nona teaches an image sensor (see at least ¶ [0029] disclosing the baler has cameras for gathering photo and/or video of bales and determining related information).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the image sensor of Nona into the combination of Smith, Figgins, and Verhaeghe with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward balers forming crop bales according to specific operation parameters and/or conditions. This would provide an additional source of information to verify bale parameters and baler operation to ensure proper bale formation.
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 JARED C BEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5255. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30AM - 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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached on (571) 272-7691. 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.
/J.C.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights