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. Specification Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” “is provided”, etc. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains implied phraseology, specifically “is provided” in line 2 thereof and also because it is greater than 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. In view of the International Search Report completed on April 4 , 202 2 and cited in the instant application 18/266,877 on June 1 3 , 2023 and in view of the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority cited in the instant application 18/266,877 on June 1 3 , 2023, c laims 1-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Fraisse et al. US 2005/0165552 A1 . With respect to claims 1 and 10, Fraisse et al. US 2005/0165552 A1 disclose a computer-implemented method (and corre s ponding system) for applying a seed product of at least one crop and/or applying a crop nutrition product to at least one crop in a field (see claim 1 and fig. 6), the method comprising: - collecting, by a data interface, remotely-sensed data (320, 322) of the field before an application of the seed product and/or crop nutrition product in the field; - determining, by a parameter determination unit, based on the collected remotely-sensed data, at least one soil parameter (324) at a plurality of locations in the field; - generating, by a yield prediction unit, for each of the plurality of locations, a predicted yield response (128) to the application of the seed product and/or crop nutrition product for the at least one crop based on the at least one determined soil parameter and a prediction model, wherein the prediction model is parametrized or trained based on a sample set (126) including a plurality of different values of the at least one soil parameter and associated yield responses for the at least one crop under the application of the seed product and/or crop nutrition product (see par. 27: calculation of yield goal); and - deciding, by a decision unit, for each of the plurality of locations in the field, whether to treat or not based (138 encompasses the map of dosage per area; thereby also implicitly the zero dosage regime where no requirement to fertilize exists) on the predicted yield response, and outputting information (132, 138) indicative of the decision useable to activate at least one treatment device to comply with the decision (see par. 29) . As to c laim s 2, 9 and 15, see the disclosure in paragraph [0029] of Fraisse et al. US 2005/0165552 A1. Regarding c laim 3 , see the disclosure in paragraph [0035] of Fraisse et al. US 2005/0165552 A1. With respect to c laim 4-8, 11 and 12, see the disclosure in paragraph [0026] of Fraisse et al. US 2005/0165552 A1. In view of the International Search Report completed on April 4 , 202 2 and cited in the instant application 18/266,877 on June 1 3 , 2023 and in view of the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority cited in the instant application 18/266,877 on June 1 3 , 2023 , c laims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Sugumaran et al. US 10,165,725 B2 . With respect to claims 13 and 14, Sugumaran et al. US 10,165,725 B2 disclose a treatment device for applying a seed product of at least one crop and/or applying crop nutrition product to at least one crop in a field, comprising:- a treatment control interface; - a treatment controlling unit; and - a treatment arrangement with one or a plurality of treatment units; wherein the treatment control interface of the treatment device (see claim 1) is connectable to the treatment control interface of the decision-support system to receive a treatment control signal (see claim 9: the device is controlled based on a n application map); and wherein the treatment controlling unit is configured to regulate respective ones of treatment units of the treatment arrangement to apply the seed product and/or crop nutrition product at respective locations based on the received treatment control signal (see claim 1) . As to claim 14, see claims 1 and 9 of Sugumaran et al. US 10,165,725 B2 . Reasoning for Claim Rejections Under 35 USC § 101 Not Being Present No rejection under 35 USC § 101 is present since parent claim 1 is directed to a prediction model , which goes well beyond involving human mental processes necessary for a rejection under 35 USC § 101 to be present. Examiner Request The examiner requests, in response to this office action, support must be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application. When responding to this office action, applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. In amending in reply to a rejection of claims in an application or patent under reexamination, the applicant or patent owner must clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. The applicant or patent owner must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CA 2 663 917 A1 disclose s variable zone crop-specific inputs, prescription, method, and system s therefor . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHRISTOPHER J NOVOSAD whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6993 . The examiner can normally be reached on a variable schedule. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Rocca M Joseph can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-8971 . 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. /Christopher J. Novosad/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 September 4 , 2025