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
Claims 1-10 and 13-17 are pending in this application.
Claims 11-12 are cancelled.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 13-17 are amended.
Claims 1-10 and 13-17 are presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 16 September 2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 2 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) second paragraph have been fully considered, and the rejections are withdrawn.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-10 and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanrieder (US Publication 2020/0409353 A1) in view of Zhan et al. (US Publication 2024/0002007 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hanrieder teaches a human machine interface for controlling a first or a second agricultural machine, comprising: a display unit for displaying (Hanrieder: Para. 49; one or more touchscreen displays capable of presenting visual representations of information) a first graphical user interface assigned to the first agricultural machine and a second graphical user interface assigned to the second agricultural machine (Hanrieder: Para. 29; the agricultural machines like the tractor and the sprayer include operator cabins and user interfaces); at least one input element for switching between the first and the second graphical user interface (Hanrieder: Para. 79, 95; touch-sensitive display and display controller detect contact on the touch-sensitive display and converts the detected contact into interaction with objects displayed on the touch-sensitive display such as soft keys; virtual terminal data to generate a touchscreen with buttons; the operator may toggle a display of the device between the various implements); and a control unit comprising a first control scheme configured to: detect a contact of the input element by an operator (Hanrieder: Para. 95; touch-sensitive display and display controller detect contact on the touch-sensitive display and converts the detected contact into interaction with objects displayed on the touch-sensitive display); ……… , wherein the second agricultural machine is an autonomously controlled machine (Hanrieder: Para. 65; automated guidance of the agricultural machine), and wherein the autonomous control of the second agricultural machine (Hanrieder: Para. 65, 72; agricultural machines are no longer separate and isolated computing systems but are part of a larger electronic ecosystem wherein changes made by users on a single machine; route plan data for automated guidance of the agricultural machine in the field).
Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach control the display unit to display the second graphical user interface while the input element is in contact with the operator; and control the display unit to display the first graphical user interface while the input element is out of contact with the operator ………. is overridable by an operation of the human machine interface when the second graphical user interface is displayed on the display unit.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches control the display unit to display the second graphical user interface while the input element is in contact with the operator (Zhan: Para. 142, 155; control commands from the user based on pressing of at least some centralized control controls 64 for certain periods of time; controls the display screen to display images corresponding to the setting function based on the received control commands; centralized operation controls may include a momentary press, a long press, and a continuous press); and control the display unit to display the first graphical user interface while the input element is out of contact with the operator (Zhan: Para. 154; if the user no longer presses the Fn button or the left button or the right button, the Fn button function will exit) ……….. is overridable by an operation of the human machine interface when the second graphical user interface is displayed on the display unit (Zhan: Para. 47, 62, 95; the control unit may control the display screen to switch from the first (instrument-focused) display mode to the second (entertainment-focused) display mode after the second operating system meets a predetermined condition; controlling the display interface of the display screen to perform adjustment to facilitate users to view relevant information and to make reasonable use of the display area of the display screen; tractors).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 2, Hanrieder teaches the human machine interface of claim 1, the control unit further comprising a second control scheme configured to: detect a toggling of the input element by an operator (Hanrieder: Para. 79; if multiple implements are connected to the ISOBUS system the operator may toggle a display of the device between the various implements); and control the display unit to display alternately the first or the second graphical user interface responsive to the toggling of the input element being detected (Hanrieder: Para. 79; if multiple implements are connected to the ISOBUS system the operator may toggle a display of the device between the various implements).
Regarding claim 3, Hanrieder teaches the human machine interface of claim 2, the control unit further configured to: determine a speed of the first agricultural machine (Hanrieder: Para. 74; communicate performance and status information to the tractor for presentation to the operator via a virtual terminal; communicate speed information).
Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach compare the speed of the first agricultural machine with a speed threshold.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches compare the speed of the first agricultural machine with a speed threshold (Zhan: Para. 139; if it is detected that the vehicle is driving).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 4, Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the control unit is operating according to the first control scheme if the speed of the first agricultural machine is exceeding the speed threshold.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the control unit is operating according to the first control scheme if the speed of the first agricultural machine is exceeding the speed threshold (Zhan: Para. 139; the switching process between the first and second display modes, the touch function of the display screen may be locked or disabled based on the control unit to ensure driving safety).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 5, Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the control unit is operating according to the second control scheme if the speed of the first agricultural machine is below or equal to the speed threshold.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the control unit is operating according to the second control scheme if the speed of the first agricultural machine is below or equal to the speed threshold (Zhan: Para. 139; touch control function of the display screen is enabled based on the control unit and the display screen is returned to a touch controllable state when the vehicle stops driving).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 6, Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the speed threshold is zero.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the speed threshold is zero (Zhan: Para. 139; if it is detected that the vehicle is driving).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 7, Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach wherein at least one input element is a foot actuatable switch.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein at least one input element is a foot actuatable switch.
Zhan teaches two operating systems shown on a controlling display screen. This allows for two different and switchable display modes (Zhan: Para. 8, 43). Zhan takes a control input to switch a first display mode to a second display mode on the display screen in order to view relevant information (Zhan: Para. 62, 95). Zhan teaches the option for control of driving equipment, such as a tractor, through control commands and adjusting various features of the vehicle (Zhan: Para. 47, 155). Zhan teaches a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving (Zhan: Para. 43). It would be obvious to one skilled in the art to use the two operating system to control two remote controllable vehicles through one display by switching the display from one tractor’s system to a second tractor’s system using a hard button. It would be obvious to one skilled in the art that a foot actuatable switch is a valid hard button in a tractor control system.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 8, Hanrieder teaches the human machine interface of claim 1, wherein at least one input element is integrated into the display unit (Hanrieder: Para. 95; display controller detect contact on the touch-sensitive display and converts the detected contact into interaction with objects displayed).
Regarding claim 9, Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach the human machine interface further comprising an additional display unit for displaying an additional graphical user interface assigned to the second agricultural machine.
However, Hanrieder is deemed to disclose an equivalent teaching. Hanrieder taches agricultural machine information includes information that is unique to particular machines as well as information that pertains to two or more machines. Hanrieder teaches a human-machine interface may include one or more touchscreen displays capable of presenting visual representations of information or data and receiving instructions or input from the user via a single display surface (Hanrieder: Para. 31, 49, Fig. 9). It would be obvious to one of ordinary art that if you have two screens and two machines that each screen would show a machine.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have each machine displayed on their own display unit when multiple displays are available taught in Hanrieder with a reasonable expectation of success because a human-machine interface with multiple displays touchscreens controlling two or more machines from the input of a single user as taught by Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 31, 49, Fig. 9).
Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the first control scheme is configured to control the additional display unit to display the additional graphical user interface while the input element is in contact with the operator.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first control scheme is configured to control the additional display unit to display the additional graphical user interface while the input element is in contact with the operator (Zhan: Para. 142, 155; control commands from the user based on pressing of at least some centralized control controls 64 for certain periods of time; controls the display screen to display images corresponding to the setting function based on the received control commands; centralized operation controls may include a momentary press, a long press, and a continuous press).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 10, Hanrieder teaches the human machine interface of claim 2, further comprising a control element (Hanrieder: Para. 95; touch-sensitive display and display controller detect contact on the touch-sensitive display and converts the detected contact into interaction with objects displayed on the touch-sensitive display).
Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the first control scheme is configured to assign the control element to the second agricultural machine while the input element is in contact with the operator; and wherein the second control scheme is configured to assign alternately the control element to the first or the second agricultural machine if a toggling of the input element is detected.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first control scheme is configured to assign the control element to the second agricultural machine while the input element is in contact with the operator (Zhan: Para. 142, 155; control commands from the user based on pressing of at least some centralized control controls for certain periods of time; display screen to display images corresponding to the setting function based on the received control commands, possibly adjusting various features of the vehicle based on the received control commands; a continuous press); and wherein the second control scheme is configured to assign alternately the control element to the first or the second agricultural machine if a toggling of the input element is detected (Zhan: Para. 8, 43; control unit is capable of controlling the display screen to display one or a plurality of instrument images and one or a plurality of entertainment images in at least two different and switchable display modes based on at least two operating systems; a first operating system and a second operating system).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 13, Hanrieder teaches a control system for controlling the first or the second agricultural machine comprising the first agricultural machine; the second agricultural machine (Hanrieder: Para. 29; a plurality of agricultural machines); and the human machine interface of claim 1 (Hanrieder: Para. 33; human-machine interfaces that include graphical user interfaces); wherein the human machine interface is integrated in the first agricultural machine (Hanrieder: Para. 33; The tractor and the sprayer are primary agricultural machines, as explained below, and include operator cabins and human-machine interfaces that include graphical user interfaces).
Regarding claim 14, Hanrieder teaches a method of controlling a first or a second agricultural machine, comprising the steps: (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79; if multiple implements are connected to the ISOBUS system the operator may toggle a display of the device between the various implements; agricultural machines like the tractor and the sprayer include operator cabins and user interfaces that form part of or work in conjunction with the onboard computing systems) …….. : checking if an input element is in contact with an operator (Hanrieder: Para. 95; sensor or set of sensors that accepts input from the user based on haptic and/or tactile contact; detect contact on the touch-sensitive display and converts the detected contact into interaction with objects displayed on the touch-sensitive display); ……. , wherein the second agricultural machine is an autonomously controlled machine (Hanrieder: Para. 65; automated guidance of the agricultural machine), and wherein the autonomous control of the second agricultural machine (Hanrieder: Para. 65, 72; agricultural machines are no longer separate and isolated computing systems but are part of a larger electronic ecosystem wherein changes made by users on a single machine; route plan data for automated guidance of the agricultural machine in the field).
Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach executing a first control scheme comprising the steps ……. displaying a first graphical user interface assigned to the first agricultural machine on a display unit while the input element is out of contact with the operator; and displaying a second graphical user interface assigned to the second agricultural machine on the display unit while the input element is in contact with the operator ……. is overridable by an operation of the human machine interface when the second graphical user interface is displayed on the display unit.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches executing a first control scheme comprising the steps (Zhan: Para. 155; control unit receives control commands) ………. displaying a first graphical user interface assigned to the first agricultural machine on a display unit while the input element is out of contact with the operator (Zhan: Para. 154; if the user no longer presses the Fn button or the left button or the right button, the Fn button function will exit); and displaying a second graphical user interface assigned to the second agricultural machine on the display unit while the input element is in contact with the operator (Zhan: Para. 142, 155; control commands from the user based on pressing of at least some centralized control controls 64 for certain periods of time; controls the display screen to display images corresponding to the setting function based on the received control commands; centralized operation controls may include a momentary press, a long press, and a continuous press) ……….. is overridable by an operation of the human machine interface when the second graphical user interface is displayed on the display unit (Zhan: Para. 47, 62, 95; the control unit may control the display screen to switch from the first (instrument-focused) display mode to the second (entertainment-focused) display mode after the second operating system meets a predetermined condition; controlling the display interface of the display screen to perform adjustment to facilitate users to view relevant information and to make reasonable use of the display area of the display screen; tractors).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 15, Hanrieder teaches the method of claim 14, comprising the steps: Determining a speed of the first agricultural machine (Hanrieder: Para. 74; communicate performance and status information to the tractor for presentation to the operator via a virtual terminal; communicate speed information).
Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach comparing the speed of the first agricultural machine with a speed threshold; wherein the first control scheme is executed if the speed of the first agricultural machine exceeds the speed threshold.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches Para. 95, 139; if it is detected that the vehicle is driving); wherein the first control scheme is executed if the speed of the first agricultural machine exceeds the speed threshold (Zhan: Para. 95, 139; the switching process between the first and second display modes, the touch function of the display screen may be locked or disabled based on the control unit to ensure driving safety; motion above a threshold speed).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 16, Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach Executing a second control scheme comprising the steps.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches Executing a second control scheme comprising the steps (Zhan: Para. 95; the touch function of the display screen could be locked during vehicle motion (or motion above a threshold speed) to ensure driving safety).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Hanrieder teaches Alternately displaying the first and the second graphical user interface on the display unit if the input element is toggled (Hanrieder: Para. 79; if multiple implements are connected to the ISOBUS system the operator may toggle a display of the device between the various implements).
Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the second control scheme is executed if the speed of the first agricultural machine is below or equal to the speed threshold.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the second control scheme is executed if the speed of the first agricultural machine is below or equal to the speed threshold (Zhan: Para. 95, 139; the touch control function of the display screen is enabled based on the control unit and the display screen is returned to a touch controllable state when the vehicle stops driving.; driving below a threshold speed).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Regarding claim 17, Hanrieder doesn’t explicitly teach Assigning a control element to the second agricultural machine while the input element is in contact with the operator.
However Zhan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches Assigning a control element to the second agricultural machine while the input element is in contact with the operator (Zhan: Para. 142, 155; control commands from the user based on pressing of at least some centralized control controls for certain periods of time; display screen to display images corresponding to the setting function based on the received control commands, possibly adjusting various features of the vehicle based on the received control commands; a continuous press).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the virtual terminal device to control multiple vehicles in Hanrieder (Hanrieder: Para. 29, 79 with the switching of displays based on a continuous press of a button taught in Zhan (Zhan: Para. 142, 154-155) with a reasonable expectation of success because one or a plurality of centralized operation controls, such as hard buttons, are arranged on the manipulation system of vehicle to improve the convenience for drivers to quickly operate key functional items during driving as taught by Zhan (Zhan: Para. 43).
Hanrieder teaches wherein the second control scheme comprises the step: Alternately assigning the control element to the first or the second agricultural machine if the input element is toggled (Hanrieder: Para. 79; if multiple implements are connected to the ISOBUS system the operator may toggle a display of the device between the various implements).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejection of claims 1-10, 13-17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s attorney argues that neither Hanrieder nor Zhan teach each and every limitation of claims 1 and 14.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, 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). The combination of Hanrieder in view of Zhan teach each and every limitation of claims 1 and 14.
Applicant next argues that Hanrieder does not teach anything in regard to two agricultural machines and autonomously controlling a second agricultural machine of the two agricultural machines.
In response to the applicant’s argument above, Hanrieder teaches a computing system spanning multiple agricultural machines (Hanrieder: Para. 24) which is backed by agricultural machines 16, 18, and 20 shown in Figure 1 (Hanrieder: Para. 29). Hanrieder teaches automatic guidance of the agricultural machine in the field through the route plan data (Hanrieder: Para. 65). Hanrieder does teach at least two agricultural machines with autonomous control.
Applicant next argues that Zhan does not teach “wherein the autonomous control of the second agricultural machine is overridable by an operation of the human machine interface when the second graphical user interface is displayed on the display unit.”
In response to the applicant’s argument above, Hanrieder teaches control of multiple agricultural machines based on user control via an offboard electronic device. The prior art teaches the user selecting a route with route plan data that the ordered agricultural machine automatically traverses the field based on the planned route (Hanrieder: Para. 65, 72). Zhan teaches a centralized operation control (Zhan: Para. 142) of driving equipment such as tractors (Zhan: Para. 47) through a switching between two different display modes (Zhan: Para. 95). Zhan’s control unit is a centralized operation control used to display relevant information by the switching between the two display modes (Zhan: Para. 62, 95, 142).
Applicant next argues that Zhan does not teach anything in regard to two agricultural machines and autonomously controlling a second agricultural machine of the two agricultural machines.
In response to the applicant’s argument above, Zhan teaches adjusting various features of the vehicle based on the received control commands from the user on the control unit display (Zhan: Para. 155). Zhan does teach their control unit as being applicable to tractors (Zhan: Para. 47).
Applicant next argues that Zhan merely teaches switching the display mode of a display of an agricultural vehicle between an instrument-focused mode and an entertainment-focused mode.
In response to the applicant’s argument above, Zhan does teach an example of a control unit with a first instrument-focused display mode and a second entertainment-focused display mode (Zhan: Para. 95). The instrument-focused and the entertainment-focused is given as an example. This was a naming convention that Zhan used as noted by the first (instrument-focused) display mode and a second (entertainment-focused) display mode. The example is a naming convention of what the data represents or conveys to the human mind, i.e. what the metric represents. The metric is nonfunctional descriptive material; therefore the naming convention is not limiting (MPEP 2111.05). Zhan’s control unit is a centralized operation control used to display relevant information by the switching between the two display modes (Zhan: Para. 62, 95, 142). Zhan does teach their control unit as being applicable to tractors (Zhan: Para. 47). It would be obvious to one of ordinary art to switch between a first tractor display mode and a second tractor display mode showing relevant operation control information to the user.
Applicant next argues that Zhan does not establish a remote control of a second agricultural vehicle, let alone override the autonomous control of the agricultural vehicle
In response to the applicant’s argument above, Hanrieder teaches control of multiple agricultural machines based on user control via an offboard electronic device. The prior art teaches the user selecting a route with route plan data that the ordered agricultural machine automatically traverses the field based on the planned route (Hanrieder: Para. 65, 72). Zhan’s control unit is a centralized operation control used to display relevant information by the switching between the two display modes (Zhan: Para. 62, 95, 142). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of vehicle control to user a switching between two display screens as taught by Zhan when centrally control multiple agricultural vehicle as taught by Hanrieder.
Applicant next argues that claims 2-10, 13, and 15-17 depend on claims 1 and 14, and are allowable at least based on their dependencies.
In response to the applicant’s argument above, claims 1 and 14 are rejected. Therefore all dependent claims are rejected at least based on their dependencies.
The applicant’s arguments have failed to point out the distinguishing characteristics of the amended claim language over the prior art. For the above reasons, Hanrieder’s control of agricultural machines in view of Zhan’s toggling control display reads on applicant’s control method for a first and a second agricultural machine. The rejection is maintained.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA E LINHARDT whose telephone number is (571)272-8325. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TR, M-F: 8am-4pm.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached on (571) 272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/L.E.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights