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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Strnad et al. (US 12,256,656).
As concerns claim 1, Strnad shows an agricultural implement (Fig. 1), comprising: a row unit (10) attached to a tool bar (8), said row unit comprising at least one soil engaging tool (60); and a non-contact optical sensor (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) arranged to measure reflectance of soil exposed by the soil engaging tool (Fig. 9 & 10); wherein the non-contact optical sensor is positioned above the soil exposed by the soil engaging tool such that an air gap is maintained between the non-contact optical sensor and the soil during the reflectance measurement (Fig. 9 & 10), and wherein no portion of the non-contact optical sensor contacts the soil during the reflectance measurement (Fig. 9 & 10).
As concerns claim 2, Strnad shows wherein said at least one soil engaging tool comprises an opener assembly (60) for opening a furrow, and a closing wheel assembly (250) for closing the furrow, and wherein said non-contact optical sensor is arranged to measure reflectance of soil exposed by the opener assembly before the soil is closed by the closing wheel assembly (Fig. 9).
As concerns claim 3, Strnad shows wherein said non-contact optical sensor (2000) comprises a first light source (2002) arranged to emit light at a first wavelength toward the soil exposed by the opener assembly, and at least one reflectance sensor (2003, 2004) arranged to measure light reflected off the soil from the first light source (Fig. 9 & 10).
As concerns claim 4, Strnad shows wherein said non- contact optical sensor further comprises a second light source arranged to emit light at a second wavelength toward the soil exposed by the opener assembly, and wherein the at least one reflectance sensor is arranged to measure light reflected off the soil from the second light source (col 4, ln 40 – col 6, ln 42).
As concerns claim 5, Strnad shows a means for estimating soil moisture by comparing an index of optical values to reflectance data provided by the at least one reflectance sensor corresponding to the first and second wavelengths (col 5, ln 44 – col 6, ln 9).
As concerns claim 7, Strnad shows an agricultural implement (Fig. 1), comprising: a row unit (10) attached to a tool bar (8), said row unit comprising at least one soil engaging tool (60); and a non-contact optical sensor (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) arranged to measure crop residue on a soil surface behind the soil engaging tool (Fig. 9 & 10); wherein the non-contact optical sensor is positioned above the soil surface such that an air gap is maintained between the non-contact optical sensor and the soil surface during measurement of crop residue (Fig. 9 & 10), and wherein no portion of the non-contact optical sensor contacts the soil surface during measurement of crop residue (Fig. 9 & 10).
As concerns claim 8, Strnad shows wherein said non-contact optical sensor is arranged to measure crop residue within a seed furrow created by said at least one soil engaging tool (Fig. 16; col 5, ln 44 – col 6, ln 9).
As concerns claim 9, Strnad shows wherein said at least one soil engaging tool comprises an opener assembly (60) arranged to create a seed furrow, and wherein said non-contact optical sensor (2000) is arranged on the implement and aimed toward a ground surface outside of the seed furrow to measure crop residue on the ground surface outside of the seed furrow (Fig. 10 & 16; col 5, ln 44 – col 6, ln 9).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strnad et al. (US 12,256,656) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Strnad et al. (US 11,612,098).
As concerns claim 6, Strnad ‘656 discloses the claimed invention except for a contact sensor on the row unit for measuring a soil property selected from the group consisting of soil EC, soil reflectance, soil moisture and soil temperature, said contact sensor being used in tandem with said non-contact optical sensor. Strnad ‘098 teaches a contact sensor (370; soil engaging ears 374 & 376) on the row unit for measuring a soil property selected from the group consisting of soil EC (electrical conductivity of soil), soil reflectance, soil moisture and soil temperature, said contact sensor being used in tandem with said non-contact optical sensor (Fig. 4A & 4B). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Strnad ‘656, as taught by Strnad ‘098, to include a contact sensor for the expected benefit of measuring a soil property in tandem with the non-contact optical sensor. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that using a contact sensor for measuring a soil property in tandem with the non-contact optical sensor would have provided predictable results and a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since the expected result of this configuration improves versatility/adaptability/efficiency of the agricultural implement design.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 are allowed over the prior art of record.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not appear to anticipate and/or render obvious an agricultural implement comprising: at least four row units attached to a tool bar, each row unit comprising a furrow opener; at least four sensor modules attached to said four row units and positioned behind said furrow openers to engage soil within furrows created by the furrow openers; and said sensor modules each having a conductive metal contact on an outer surface thereof to engage soil within the furrows, and said sensor modules are aligned with each other so that the metal contacts of the sensor modules form an array of electrodes for measuring soil EC; wherein the array of electrodes comprises an array of four electrodes, including one electrode associated with each of the at least four row units, such that the array spans a width of four rows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/02/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/02/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 10-12 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
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 MATTHEW R BUCK whose telephone number is (571)270-3653. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-5.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571)272-5405. 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.
/MATTHEW R BUCK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights