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 Office Action is in response to the application filed on 04 November 2025. Claims 1-6, 8-22, and 39-43 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Claims 7 and 23-38 are cancelled.
Response to Amendments
In response to Applicant’s amendments dated 04 November 2025, Examiner withdraws the previous claim objections to claims 4, 9, 22, and 41-42; maintains the previous claim objections to claim 12; withdraws the previous specification objections; withdraws the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections; withdraws the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejections; and withdraws the previous prior art rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, pg. 12-14, filed 04 November 2025, with respect to independent claim(s) 1, 10, and 39 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.
The remaining arguments, see Remarks, pg. 14-15, regarding the dependent claims, are essentially the same as those addressed above and/or below and are moot for at least the same reasons.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) was/were submitted on 04 November 2025. The submission(s) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statement(s) is/are being considered by the Examiner.
Priority
Request for priority to Provisional App. No. 63/354,112, filed 21 June 2022, and 63/367,910, filed 07 July 2022, is acknowledged. Examiner notes that the current claims do not appear to be fully supported by the provisional application and further notes that the Applicant may be requested to perfect one or more of the claims in the situation where applied prior art has priority falling between the filing date of the non-provisional application dated 21 June 2023 and the provisional application dated 21 June 2022. No action on the part of the Applicant is requested at this time.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 12 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12: “…based on a product of the one or more slurry characteristics and the corresponding application thresholds…” should be “…based on a product of the one or more slurry characteristics and the one or more corresponding application thresholds…”;
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-12, 17, and 39-43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-5967066-A, hereinafter “Giles” (previously of record), in view of WO-2022112612-A2, hereinafter “Madsen” (newly of record).
Regarding claim 1, and analogous claims 10 and 39, Giles discloses an agricultural slurry application system (Giles, FIG. 1: system 10; col. 5, lines 45-52), comprising:
Giles also discloses a method for applying an agricultural slurry (Giles, col. 5, lines 3-5: “The present invention is generally directed to a system and to a process [i.e., a method] for applying a volatile liquid fertilizer [i.e., applying an agricultural slurry], such as ammonia, to a field.”)…
a slurry reservoir configured to contain a quantity of an agricultural slurry (Giles, col. 5, lines 48-51: “System 10 includes a pressurized vessel 14 [i.e., slurry reservoir], which is adapted to hold and maintain a substantial portion of the volatile liquid fertilizer [i.e., contain a quantity of an agricultural slurry], which is normally ammonia, in a liquid state.”);
a slurry applicator configured to apply the agricultural slurry to soil (Giles, FIG. 2; col. 5, lines 53-58: “The pressure contained within vessel 14 is used to pump the ammonia from the vessel into a distribution manifold 18. Distribution manifold 18 [i.e., slurry applicator] includes a plurality of supply lines 20. Supply lines 20 [i.e., slurry applicator] are each connected to a dispensing tube 22 [i.e., slurry applicator] for injecting the ammonia into a soil [i.e., configured to apply the agricultural slurry to soil] as more clearly illustrated in FIG. 2.”),
the agricultural slurry received from the slurry reservoir (Giles, FIG. 2; col. 5, lines 53-58: “The pressure contained within vessel 14 [i.e., slurry reservoir] is used to pump the ammonia from the vessel into a distribution manifold 18 [i.e., agricultural slurry received from the slurry reservoir]. Distribution manifold 18 includes a plurality of supply lines 20. Supply lines 20 are each connected to a dispensing tube 22 for injecting the ammonia into a soil as more clearly illustrated in FIG. 2.”), and
the slurry applicator is configured for coupling with a prime mover (Giles, FIG. 1; col. 5, lines 45-47: “Referring to FIG. 1, a volatile liquid fertilizer application system generally 10 is illustrated. System 10, in this embodiment, is being drawn across a field by a tractor 12 [i.e., configured for coupling with a prime mover].”);
a conduit in communication between the slurry reservoir and the slurry applicator (Giles, FIG. 1; col. 5, lines 59-63: “AS shown, each of the dispensing tubes 22 are positioned behind a corresponding knife or chisel plow 24, which is adapted to plow through a field and allow the ammonia to be injected below the surface of the soil. Knives 24 are attached to a boom 26 which is also used to support supply lines 20 [i.e., conduit in communication between the slurry reservoir and the slurry applicator].”)…
…a slurry application controller configured to control application of the agricultural slurry with one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator (Giles, col. 7, lines 18-30: “During use, pulsating valve 30 can be connected to a controller via electrical leads 40. The controller [i.e., slurry application controller], which can be a microprocessor or other programmable device, can be adapted to calculate a desired flow rate of the ammonia or fertilizer through the valve [i.e., configured to control application of the agricultural slurry]. Specifically, the controller can be a variable frequency, variable duty cycle, square wave generator that produces the output pulses with the desired frequency and width or time duration. Pulsating valve 30 then receives the signals from the controller and opens and closes in response to the output pulses. The signal generated by the controller and received by the valve determines the flow rate of the fertilizer flowing through the dispensing tubes [i.e., with one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator].”),
the slurry application controller includes: a characteristic comparator configured to compare the determined one or more slurry characteristics with one or more corresponding application thresholds of a prescription map (Giles, col. 10, lines 50-62: “In general, Global Positioning Systems use satellites and other devices to determine the immediate location of a vehicle in a field and then use prescription field maps [i.e., prescription map] to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied at each location in the field [i.e., one or more corresponding application thresholds]. In this regard, the system of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 in communication with controller 60 [i.e., slurry application controller]. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information [i.e., configured to compare the determined one or more slurry characteristics] to controller 60, which controller 60 can use to control the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pull sating valves 30.”),
the prescription map having a plurality of zones, each zone of the plurality of zones having the one or more corresponding application thresholds associated with a target soil characteristic profile for each zone (Giles, col. 10, lines 50-55: “In general, Global Positioning Systems use satellites and other devices to determine the immediate location of a vehicle in a field and then use prescription field maps [i.e., prescription map] to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied [i.e., having the one or more corresponding application thresholds associated with a target soil characteristic profile for each zone] at each location in the field [i.e., plurality of zones].”); and
an operation interface configured to control one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator according to the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the one or more corresponding application thresholds (Giles, FIG. 3; col. 7, lines 18-31: “During use, pulsating valve 30 can be connected to a controller via electrical leads 40 [i.e., operation interface configured to control]. The controller, which can be a microprocessor or other programmable device, can be adapted to calculate a desired flow rate of the ammonia or fertilizer through the valve [i.e., one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator]. Specifically, the controller can be a variable frequency, variable duty cycle, square wave generator that produces the output pulses with the desired frequency and width or time duration [i.e., according to the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the one or more corresponding application thresholds]. Pulsating valve 30 then receives the signals from the controller and opens and closes in response to the output pulses. The signal generated by the controller and received by the valve determines the flow rate of the fertilizer flowing through the dispensing tubes.”; col. 10, lines 34-44: “More particularly, controller 60 can be programmed with the thermodynamic state of the fertilizer, such as ammonia, at all temperatures and pressures. By receiving temperature and pressure information from pressure sensing devices 70 and 80 and from temperature sensing devices 78 and 82, controller 60 can be configured to precisely control the temperature, pressure, density, and vapor pressure of the fertilizer from pressurized tank 14 until it is ultimately injected into a soil through dispensing tubes 22. Through this arrangement, flow rates can be precisely controlled and measured as desired [i.e., according to the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the one or more corresponding application thresholds].”).
Giles does not appear to explicitly disclose the following:
…a concentration characteristic sensor coupled with one or more of the slurry reservoir or the conduit, wherein the concentration characteristic sensor is configured to determine one or more slurry characteristics, the one or more slurry characteristics including concentrations of one or more slurry components; and…
However, in the same field of endeavor, Madsen teaches:
…a concentration characteristic sensor coupled with one or more of the slurry reservoir or the conduit, wherein the concentration characteristic sensor is configured to determine one or more slurry characteristics, the one or more slurry characteristics including concentrations of one or more slurry components (Madsen, pg. 8, lines 6-10: “Information from the slurry tanker… Nitrogen kg N/m3 - as NH4 and total N. Data collected through NIR Sensor [i.e., a concentration characteristic sensor coupled with one or more of the slurry reservoir or the conduit], NMSRS [i.e., a concentration characteristic sensor coupled with one or more of the slurry reservoir or the conduit], chemical laboratory analysis or normed estimate from extension services…”; pg. 8, lines 32-33: “The contents of nitrogen in the slurry is ideally measured pr. slurry storage tank or pr. slurry tanker load with an on-bord NIR or NMRS scanner.”; pg. 11, lines 8-12: “A slurry tanker may mean a combination of a tractor and slurry tanker or a self-propelled slurry tanker. When a slurry tanker has acidification technology installed, the pH is known. If the slurry tanker has a NIR sensor or an NMRS scanner [i.e., a concentration characteristic sensor coupled with one or more of the slurry reservoir or the conduit], the nitrogen contend is precisely identified [i.e., configured to determine one or more slurry characteristics, the one or more slurry characteristics including concentrations of one or more slurry components]. Volume of slurry is very accurately measured from a flow sensor or less accurate from the slurry pump.”); and…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, with the concept of using a sensor to determine the concentration of the components of an agricultural slurry applied to a field, taught by Madsen, in order to improve the nitrogen (or other nutrients) utilization efficiency of agricultural fertilization for increased productivity of the soil and/or comply with relevant legal fertilizer utilization requirements (Madsen, pg. 3, lines 1-12: “Slurry is a good soil improvement source because of the organic matter and the plant nutrients stimulate plant growth. The application rate (m3/ha) is variable and often depends on nitrogen or phosphorus, with a maximum of 170 kg nitrogen pr. ha with use of slurry (EU nitrate directive). Outside of EU, application rates may be much higher. The framework conditions for slurry application is very much an umbrella that determine the equipment used and thus the application technologies used. Most framework conditions have a requirement for the slurry nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUE), very often between 60 to 85%. They are very often based on a comparison with mineral fertilizers, which have a well-established utilization efficiency of approx. 80%. The slurry equivalent is thus often 60% to 85% of the 80%, leaving the actual utilization requirement at 40% to 50%. Some countries like e.g. USA, have no NUE requirement for slurry.”; pg. 1, lines 23-33: “The Nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUE) can be improved in many ways, where the trend towards acidification for ammonia reduction from slurry is noticeable. Using information/data achieved in real time, it is possible to calculate and present the Real-Time-NUE (RTNUE) on site e.g. on-board the tractor. The RTNUE is based on the current NUE influencing factors and calculates a future NUE when the ammonia emission has departed. The RTNUE will enable the driver/farm manager to make informed decisions on when to use acidification or other means to improve the NUE when it is cost effective to do so. The system and method may further provide documentation of the NUE variability in the field to generate a variable application rate map for mineral fertilizer application to make a uniform application of fertilizers.”).
Regarding claim 2, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 1, and Giles further discloses:
wherein the operation interface controls one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator to apply a specified quantity of the agricultural slurry within each zone based on the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the prescription map (Giles, col. 10, lines 50-55: “In general, Global Positioning Systems use satellites and other devices to determine the immediate location of a vehicle in a field and then use prescription field maps to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied [i.e., based on the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the prescription map] at each location in the field [i.e., within each zone].”; col. 10, lines 34-44: “More particularly, controller 60 can be programmed with the thermodynamic state of the fertilizer, such as ammonia, at all temperatures and pressures. By receiving temperature and pressure information from pressure sensing devices 70 and 80 and from temperature sensing devices 78 and 82, controller 60 can be configured to precisely control the temperature, pressure, density, and vapor pressure of the fertilizer from pressurized tank 14 until it is ultimately injected into a soil through dispensing tubes 22 [i.e., specified quantity of the agricultural slurry within each zone]. Through this arrangement, flow rates can be precisely controlled and measured as desired.”).
Regarding claim 8, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 1, and Giles further discloses:
wherein the target soil characteristic profile comprises one or more of ammonia concentration in the soil, ammonium concentration in the soil, nitrogen concentration in the soil, phosphorous concentration in the soil, or potassium concentration in the soil (Giles, col. 8, lines 3-7: “Based on the speed information, controller 60 determines the flow rate of ammonia through pulsating valves 30 in order to arrive at a desired application rate expressed in quantity of fertilizer per area of land [i.e., ammonia concentration in the soil].”).
Regarding claim 9, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 8, and Giles further discloses:
wherein the target soil characteristic profile is based on one or more of: type of crop grown in the soil, grain yield goal for the type of the crop grown in the soil, biomass yield goal for the type of the crop grown in the soil, expected nutrient uptake for the type of the crop grown in the soil, or an initial condition of the soil (Giles, col. 5, lines 39-44: “In particular, the rate at which the fertilizer is injected into the soil can be continuously monitored and changed depending upon the speed at which the system is moved across a field, the type of soil that is being treated, the dimensions of the treated area, and based on any other factors and circumstances.”).
Regarding claim 11, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 10, and Giles further discloses the following:
wherein the…sensor is coupled along the conduit (Giles, FIG. 3; FIG. 5; col. 8, lines 14-16: “In order to monitor the flow rate of the liquid fertilizer through the system, a flow meter 64 can be placed between pressurized tank 14 and distribution manifold 18.”).
Giles does not explicitly disclose a “concentration characteristic sensor”. However, in the same field of endeavor, Madsen teaches the use of a “concentration characteristic sensor” (Madsen, pg. 8, lines 32-33: “The contents of nitrogen in the slurry is ideally measured pr. slurry storage tank or pr. slurry tanker load with an on-bord NIR or NMRS scanner.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen, with the concept of using a sensor to determine the concentration of the components of an agricultural slurry applied to a field, taught by Madsen, in order to improve the nitrogen (or other nutrients) utilization efficiency of agricultural fertilization for increased productivity of the soil and/or comply with relevant legal fertilizer utilization requirements (Madsen, pg. 3, lines 1-12: “Slurry is a good soil improvement source because of the organic matter and the plant nutrients stimulate plant growth. The application rate (m3/ha) is variable and often depends on nitrogen or phosphorus, with a maximum of 170 kg nitrogen pr. ha with use of slurry (EU nitrate directive). Outside of EU, application rates may be much higher. The framework conditions for slurry application is very much an umbrella that determine the equipment used and thus the application technologies used. Most framework conditions have a requirement for the slurry nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUE), very often between 60 to 85%. They are very often based on a comparison with mineral fertilizers, which have a well-established utilization efficiency of approx. 80%. The slurry equivalent is thus often 60% to 85% of the 80%, leaving the actual utilization requirement at 40% to 50%. Some countries like e.g. USA, have no NUE requirement for slurry.”; pg. 1, lines 23-33: “The Nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUE) can be improved in many ways, where the trend towards acidification for ammonia reduction from slurry is noticeable. Using information/data achieved in real time, it is possible to calculate and present the Real-Time-NUE (RTNUE) on site e.g. on-board the tractor. The RTNUE is based on the current NUE influencing factors and calculates a future NUE when the ammonia emission has departed. The RTNUE will enable the driver/farm manager to make informed decisions on when to use acidification or other means to improve the NUE when it is cost effective to do so. The system and method may further provide documentation of the NUE variability in the field to generate a variable application rate map for mineral fertilizer application to make a uniform application of fertilizers.”).
Regarding claim 12, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 10, and Giles further discloses:
wherein the application control module is configured to determine the slurry application value based on a product of the one or more slurry characteristics and the corresponding application thresholds (Giles, col. 8, lines 14-20: “In order to monitor the flow rate of the liquid fertilizer through the system, a flow meter 64 can be placed between pressurized tank 14 and distribution manifold 18. Flow meter 64 as shown is in communication with controller 60 [i.e., application control module]. Specifically, flow meter 64 sends flow rate information [i.e., based on a product of the one or more slurry characteristics] to controller 60 for use in calculating the duty cycle of pulsating valves 30 [i.e., determine the slurry application value] in relation to the Speed at which dispensing tubes 22 are moved across a field.”; col. 10, lines 56-62: “In this regard, the system of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 in communication with controller 60. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information to controller 60 [i.e., based on…and the corresponding application thresholds], which controller 60 can use to control the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pull sating valves 30 [i.e., determine the slurry application value].”).
Regarding claim 17, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 10, and Giles further discloses:
wherein: the one or more corresponding application thresholds comprise an active application threshold of a plurality of application thresholds, and each of the plurality of application thresholds is associated with respective zones of a prescription map (Giles, col. 10, lines 50-55: “In general, Global Positioning Systems use satellites and other devices to determine the immediate location of a vehicle in a field and then use prescription field maps [i.e., each of the plurality of application thresholds is associated with respective zones of a prescription map] to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied at each location in the field [i.e., an active application threshold of a plurality of application thresholds].”); and
the slurry application controller is configured to change the active application threshold based on a location of the prime mover with respect to the zones of the prescription map (Giles, col. 10, lines 56-62: “In this regard, the System of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 [i.e., based on a location of the prime mover with respect to the zones of the prescription map] in communication with controller 60 [i.e., slurry application controller]. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information [i.e., configured to change the active application threshold] to controller 60, which controller 60 can use to control the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pull sating valves 30.”).
Regarding claim 40, Giles and Madsen teach the method of claim 39, and Giles further discloses:
further comprising: determining characteristics of soil; comparing the characteristics of the soil with the target soil characteristic profile (Giles, col. 10, lines 53-55: “…then use prescription field maps [i.e., characteristics of soil] to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied at each location in the field [i.e., comparing the characteristics of the soil with the target soil characteristic profile].”); and
controlling one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator according to the comparison of the characteristics of the soil with the target soil characteristic profile (Giles, col. 10, lines 56-62: “In this regard, the System of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 in communication with controller 60 [i.e., according to the comparison of the characteristics of the soil with the target soil characteristic profile]. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information to controller 60, which controller 60 can use to control the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pulsating valves 30 [i.e., controlling one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator].”).
Regarding claim 41, Giles and Madsen teach the method of claim 39,
further comprising determining a slurry application value based on the comparison of the slurry characteristics with the one or more corresponding dynamic application thresholds (Giles, col. 5, lines 36-43: “This resolution, coupled with the fast response times, allows total control of fertilizer application rates. In particular, the rate at which the fertilizer is injected into the soil can be continuously monitored and changed depending upon the speed at which the system is moved across a field, the type of soil that is being treated, the dimensions of the treated area, and based on any other factors and circumstances.”; col. 10, lines 56-62: “In this regard, the system of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 in communication with controller 60 [i.e., based on the comparison of the slurry characteristics with the one or more corresponding dynamic application thresholds]. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information to controller 60, which controller 60 can use to control [i.e., determining a slurry application value] the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pulsating valves 30.”).
Regarding claim 42, Giles and Madsen teach the method of claim 41, and Giles further discloses:
wherein the one or more corresponding dynamic application thresholds are included in a prescription map, and controlling one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator includes applying a specified quantity of the agricultural slurry within each zone of a field based on a comparison of the determined slurry characteristics with the prescription map (Giles, col. 10, lines 53-55: “…then use prescription field maps to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied at each location in the field [i.e., dynamic application thresholds are included in a prescription map].”; col. 10, lines 56-62: “In this regard, the system of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 in communication with controller 60. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information [i.e., based on a comparison of the determined slurry characteristics with the prescription map] to controller 60, which controller 60 can use to control the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pulsating valves 30 [i.e., controlling one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator includes applying a specified quantity of the agricultural slurry within each zone of a field].”).
Regarding claim 43, Giles and Madsen teach the method of claim 41, and Giles further discloses:
further comprising minimizing differences between the target soil characteristic profile and determined soil characteristics, minimizing the differences including applying the agricultural slurry to soil having the determined soil characteristics (Giles, col. 10, lines 36-44: “By receiving temperature and pressure information from pressure sensing devices 70 and 80 and from temperature sensing devices 78 and 82, controller 60 can be configured to precisely control the temperature, pressure, density, and vapor pressure of the fertilizer from pressurized tank 14 until it is ultimately injected into a soil through dispensing tubes 22. Through this arrangement, flow rates can be precisely controlled and measured as desired [i.e., applying the agricultural slurry to soil having the determined soil characteristics].”; col. 10, lines 45-55: “The ability to precisely control the volatile liquid fertilizer makes the system of the present invention especially well suited for use in precision agricultural applications. For instance, Global Positioning Systems (GPS), as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,334,987 to Teach, have created opportunities for greater automation of agricultural application. In general, Global Positioning Systems use satellites and other devices to determine the immediate location of a vehicle in a field and then use prescription field maps [i.e., differences between a target soil characteristic profile and determined soil characteristics] to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied at each location in the field.”).
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles, in view of Madsen, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO-2015164791-A1, hereinafter “Huenemann” (previously of record).
Regarding claim 3, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 1, and Giles further discloses:
wherein: the plurality of zones comprises a first zone and a second zone; the first zone has a first set of application thresholds… (Giles, col. 10, lines 50-55: “In general, Global Positioning Systems use satellites and other devices to determine the immediate location of a vehicle in a field and then use prescription field maps to determine how much fertilizer or chemical should be applied [i.e., set of application thresholds] at each location in the field [i.e., plurality of zones].”); and
the operation interface is configured to control one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator according to a comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the first set of application thresholds (Giles, col. 10, lines 34-44: “More particularly, controller 60 can be programmed with the thermodynamic state of the fertilizer, such as ammonia, at all temperatures and pressures. By receiving temperature and pressure information from pressure sensing devices 70 and 80 and from temperature sensing devices 78 and 82, controller 60 can be configured to precisely control [i.e., operation interface is configured to control] the temperature, pressure, density, and vapor pressure of the fertilizer [i.e., determined one or more slurry characteristics] from pressurized tank 14 until it is ultimately injected into a soil through dispensing tubes 22. Through this arrangement, flow rates can be precisely controlled and measured as desired [i.e., according to a comparison…with the first set of application thresholds].”; col. 10, lines 56-62: “In this regard, the System of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 in communication with controller 60. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information to controller 60, which controller 60 can use to control the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pulsating valves 30.”)…
Giles and Madsen do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
…the second zone has a second set of application thresholds…comparison…with…the second set of application thresholds…
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huenemann teaches:
…the second zone has a second set of application thresholds…comparison…with…the second set of application thresholds (Huenemann, para. 0021: “For example, if the sensor 14 outputs a signal to a controller indicative of a soil property that is below a threshold value, the controller may modify agricultural operations to enhance efficiency and/or increase yield. For example, the controller may instruct a fertilizing implement to increase fertilizer levels applied to the agricultural field while the sensor 14 detects insufficient nitrogen levels in the soil [i.e., first set of application thresholds]. Moreover, the controller may instruct a planting implement to deposit fewer seeds in an area having undesirable planting properties, such as salinity, nitrogen levels, clay content, moisture content, and the like [i.e., second set of application thresholds]. Additionally, the controller may instruct a tillage implement to decrease a penetration depth of discs in an area having a low clay content. In other embodiments, the controller may instruct a soil conditioning implement to decrease a downward pressure of rolling baskets in an area having a surface roughness below the threshold value [i.e., second set of application thresholds].”)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen, with the concept of an agricultural application system with the capability of applying relevant materials to meet the thresholds of more than one targeted soil characteristic, taught by Huenemann, in order to effect change in the soil to maximize yield and/or increase planting efficiency (Huenemann, para. 0003: “Certain agricultural operators may conduct soil analysis before beginning planting operations in agricultural fields. Soil analysis may facilitate in planning of planting operations, thereby increasing yield and/or planting efficiency… As a result, operators may reduce waste and save time by limiting planting and/or conditioning to desirable areas of an agricultural field.”).
Regarding claim 4, Giles, Madsen and Huenemann teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 3, and Giles further discloses the following:
wherein: the operation interface is configured to control one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator in a first operating condition based on the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the first set of application thresholds (Giles, col. 10, lines 34-44: “More particularly, controller 60 can be programmed with the thermodynamic state of the fertilizer, such as ammonia, at all temperatures and pressures. By receiving temperature and pressure information from pressure sensing devices 70 and 80 and from temperature sensing devices 78 and 82, controller 60 can be configured to precisely control [i.e., operation interface is configured to control] the temperature, pressure, density, and vapor pressure of the fertilizer [i.e., a first operating condition…determined one or more slurry characteristics] from pressurized tank 14 until it is ultimately injected into a soil through dispensing tubes 22. Through this arrangement, flow rates can be precisely controlled and measured as desired [i.e., based on the comparison of…with the first set of application thresholds].”; col. 10, lines 56-62: “In this regard, the System of the present invention as shown in FIG. 3 can include a GPS location and rate map device 84 in communication with controller 60. GPS location and rate map device 84 can provide continuous information to controller 60, which controller 60 can use to control the flow rate of fertilizer through each of the pulsating valves 30.”); and
Giles and Madsen do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
the operation interface is configured to control one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator in a second operating condition based on the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the second set of application thresholds.
However, Huenemann teaches:
the operation interface is configured to control one or more of the prime mover or the slurry applicator in a second operating condition based on the comparison of the determined one or more slurry characteristics with the second set of application thresholds (Huenemann, para. 0021: “For example, if the sensor 14 outputs a signal to a controller indicative of a soil property that is below a threshold value, the controller may modify agricultural operations to enhance efficiency and/or increase yield. For example, the controller may instruct a fertilizing implement to increase fertilizer levels applied to the agricultural field while the sensor 14 detects insufficient nitrogen levels in the soil [i.e., first set of application thresholds]. Moreover, the controller may instruct a planting implement to deposit fewer seeds in an area having undesirable planting properties, such as salinity, nitrogen levels, clay content, moisture content, and the like [i.e., a second operating condition…with second set of application thresholds]. Additionally, the controller may instruct a tillage implement to decrease a penetration depth of discs in an area having a low clay content. In other embodiments, the controller may instruct a soil conditioning implement to decrease a downward pressure of rolling baskets in an area having a surface roughness below the threshold value [i.e., second set of application thresholds].”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen and Huenemann, with the concept of an agricultural application system with the capability of applying relevant materials or completing certain actions, using more than one operating mode, to meet the thresholds of more than one targeted soil characteristic, taught by Huenemann, in order to effect change in the soil to maximize yield and/or increase planting efficiency (Huenemann, para. 0003: “Certain agricultural operators may conduct soil analysis before beginning planting operations in agricultural fields. Soil analysis may facilitate in planning of planting operations, thereby increasing yield and/or planting efficiency… As a result, operators may reduce waste and save time by limiting planting and/or conditioning to desirable areas of an agricultural field.”).
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles, in view of Madsen and Huenemann, as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of US-20190072937-A1, hereinafter “Saito” (previously of record).
Regarding claim 5, Giles, Madsen and Huenemann teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 4, but do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
wherein: the operation interface is configured to control speed of the prime mover; the first operating condition comprises a first speed of the prime mover; the second operating condition comprises a second speed of the prime mover; and the first speed of the prime mover is different than the second speed of the prime mover.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Saito teaches:
wherein: the operation interface is configured to control speed of the prime mover (Saito, para. 0035: “The automatic steering device 13 uses the positioning data obtained by the location identifying device 12, to steer the tractor 10 in accordance with a predetermined route. Moreover, the automatic steering device 13 [i.e., the operation interface] controls the speed of the tractor 10 [i.e., prime mover] in response to a speed signal output from the control device 100. The control device 100 performs a process to control the speed of the tractor 10 corresponding to the growth condition of the crop in the field.”);
the first operating condition comprises a first speed of the prime mover (Saito, para. 0036: “A location at which the growth condition is inferior [i.e., first operating condition] requires a greater amount of fertilizer application, which causes the fertilizer distributing device to travel at a lower speed [i.e., a first speed of the prime mover].”);
the second operating condition comprises a second speed of the prime mover (Saito, para. 0036: “In contrast, a location at which the growth condition is superior [i.e., second operating condition] requires a smaller amount of fertilizer application, which causes the fertilizer distributing device to travel at a higher speed [i.e., a second speed of the prime mover].”); and
the first speed of the prime mover is different than the second speed of the prime mover (Saito, para. 0036: “The speed map shows traveling speeds [i.e., first speed of the prime mover is different than the second speed] of the fertilizer distributing device required to apply fertilizer in accordance with the fertilizing map under the condition that the amount of the fertilizer to be discharged from the fertilizer distributing device is constant at each location in the field.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen and Huenemann, with the concept of using a controller to control the speed of a prime mover of an agricultural application system, taught by Saito, in order to accurately and efficiently effect variable changes to the soil for maximizing yield or operational efficiency (Saito, para. 0013: “The present invention provides a technique that enables low-cost control of the amount of fertilizer applied. The present invention provides a device that enables application of fertilizer in an amount corresponding to a growth condition of a crop in a field, and the device can later be mounted, for example, on a fertilizer distributing device of a user.”).
Regarding claim 6, Giles, Madsen, Huenemann, and Saito teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 5, and Giles further discloses the following:
wherein: the operation interface is configured to control a flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator (Giles, col. 3, lines 40-46: “A controller [i.e., operation interface] in communication with the flow meter and the constant pressure flow rate control devices, adjusts the flow rate control devices for dispensing the volatile liquid fertilizer at a selected flow rate [i.e., control a flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator]. The controller dispenses the fertilizer while maintaining the volatile liquid fertilizer at a pressure within the distribution manifold sufficient to maintain the fertilizer in a liquid form.”);
the first operating condition comprises a first flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator (Giles, col. 4, lines 18-20: “From the distribution manifold, the fertilizer is injected into a soil at a predetermined flow rate through a plurality of dispensing tubes [i.e., a first flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator]. In accordance with the present invention, the fertilizer is maintained in a liquid form throughout the distribution manifold [i.e., the first operating condition].”);
Giles and Madsen do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
the second operating condition comprises a second flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator; and the first flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator is different than the second flow rate.
However, Huenemann teaches:
the second operating condition comprises a second flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator (Huenemann, para. 0019: “For example, in certain embodiments, a controller may receive the signal output by the soil analyzer and may provide operating instructions to the agricultural implement 16 to adjust planting operations [i.e., second operating condition] based on the signal. For instance, fewer seeds may be deposited in an area of soil where nitrogen levels are below a desired value [i.e., a second flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator]. As a result, the controller may instruct a meter roller to decrease the quantity of seeds directed toward the surface 22 while the implement 16 is positioned within the low-nitrogen region.”); and
the first flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator is different than the second flow rate (Huenemann, para. 0019: “As a result, the controller may instruct a meter roller to decrease the quantity of seeds directed toward the surface 22 [i.e., a second flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator] while the implement 16 is positioned within the low-nitrogen region. Additionally, fertilizer application levels may be increased [i.e., the first flow rate of the agricultural slurry through the slurry applicator] in areas in which low nitrogen levels are detected.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen, Huenemann and Saito, with the concept of an agricultural application system capable of executing more than one operating condition for affecting change in the soil of a field and using more than one flow rate of materials being deposited into the soil, taught by Huenemann, in order to efficiently change the relevant characteristics of the soil to increase yield and/or increase the efficiency of the agricultural operations (Huenemann, para. 0021: “As described above, positioning the sensor 14 up-field of the agricultural implement 16 (e.g., farther forward relative to the direction of travel 24) enables real-time or near real-time analysis and control of planting, fertilizing, and/or conditioning operations. For example, if the sensor 14 outputs a signal to a controller indicative of a soil property that is below a threshold value, the controller may modify agricultural operations to enhance efficiency and/or increase yield.”).
Claim(s) 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles, in view of Madsen, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of US-20190072937-A1, hereinafter “Saito” (previously of record).
Regarding claim 13, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 12, but do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
wherein the operation interface controls a speed of the prime mover based on the slurry application value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Saito teaches:
wherein the operation interface controls a speed of the prime mover based on the slurry application value (Saito, para. 0035: “The automatic steering device 13 uses the positioning data obtained by the location identifying device 12, to steer the tractor 10 in accordance with a predetermined route. Moreover, the automatic steering device 13 [i.e., the operation interface] controls the speed of the tractor 10 [i.e., controls a speed of the prime mover] in response to a speed signal output from the control device 100. The control device 100 performs a process to control the speed of the tractor 10 corresponding to the growth condition of the crop in the field.”; para. 0036: “The speed map shows traveling speeds of the fertilizer distributing device required to apply fertilizer in accordance with the fertilizing map under the condition that the amount of the fertilizer to be discharged from the fertilizer distributing device is constant at each location in the field [i.e., based on the slurry application value].”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen, with the concept of using a controller to control the speed of a prime mover of an agricultural application system based on the desired application value, taught by Saito, in order to accurately and efficiently effect variable changes to the soil for maximizing yield or operational efficiency (Saito, para. 0013: “The present invention provides a technique that enables low-cost control of the amount of fertilizer applied. The present invention provides a device that enables application of fertilizer in an amount corresponding to a growth condition of a crop in a field, and the device can later be mounted, for example, on a fertilizer distributing device of a user.”).
Regarding claim 14, Giles, Madsen and Saito teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 13, and Saito further teaches the following:
wherein: the operation interface is configured to increase the speed of the prime mover in correspondence with an increase in the slurry application value (Saito, para. 0036: “In contrast, a location at which the growth condition is superior requires a smaller amount of fertilizer application [i.e., an increase in the slurry application value], which causes the fertilizer distributing device to travel at a higher speed [i.e., increase the speed of the prime mover].”); and
the operation interface is configured to decrease the speed of the prime mover in correspondence with a decrease in the slurry application value (Saito, para. 0036: “A location at which the growth condition is inferior requires a greater amount of fertilizer application [i.e., a decrease in the slurry application value], which causes the fertilizer distributing device to travel at a lower speed [i.e., decrease the speed of the prime mover].”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen and Saito, with the concept of using a controller to control the speed of a prime mover of an agricultural application system based on the desired application value, taught by Saito, in order to accurately and efficiently effect variable changes to the soil for maximizing yield or operational efficiency (Saito, para. 0013: “The present invention provides a technique that enables low-cost control of the amount of fertilizer applied. The present invention provides a device that enables application of fertilizer in an amount corresponding to a growth condition of a crop in a field, and the device can later be mounted, for example, on a fertilizer distributing device of a user.”).
Regarding claim 15, Giles, Madsen and Saito teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 13, and Saito further teaches the following:
wherein the operation interface is configured to maintain the speed of the prime mover in correspondence with a static slurry application value (Saito, para. 0035: “The automatic steering device 13 [i.e., operation interface] uses the positioning data obtained by the location identifying device 12, to steer the tractor 10 in accordance with a predetermined route. Moreover, the automatic steering device 13 controls the speed of the tractor 10 in response to a speed signal output from the control device 100. The control device 100 performs a process to control the speed of the tractor 10 [i.e., maintain the speed of the prime mover] corresponding to the growth condition of the crop in the field [i.e., in correspondence with a static slurry application value].”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen and Saito, with the concept of using a controller to control the speed of a prime mover of an agricultural application system based on the desired application value, taught by Saito, in order to accurately and efficiently effect variable changes to the soil for maximizing yield or operational efficiency (Saito, para. 0013: “The present invention provides a technique that enables low-cost control of the amount of fertilizer applied. The present invention provides a device that enables application of fertilizer in an amount corresponding to a growth condition of a crop in a field, and the device can later be mounted, for example, on a fertilizer distributing device of a user.”).
Regarding claim 16, Giles, Madsen and Saito teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 13, and Giles further discloses the following:
wherein the operation interface is configured to control one or more of flow rate through the slurry applicator or dilution of the agricultural slurry based on the slurry application value (Giles, col. 3, lines 40-46: “A controller [i.e., operation interface] in communication with the flow meter and the constant pressure flow rate control devices, adjusts the flow rate control devices for dispensing the volatile liquid fertilizer at a selected flow rate [i.e., control one or more of flow rate through the slurry applicator or dilution of the agricultural slurry based on the slurry application value]. The controller dispenses the fertilizer while maintaining the volatile liquid fertilizer at a pressure within the distribution manifold sufficient to maintain the fertilizer in a liquid form.”).
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles, in view of Madsen, as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of US 5,220,876 A, hereinafter “Monson” (previously of record).
Regarding claim 18, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 17, but do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
wherein the prescription map has a plurality of target soil characteristic profiles indexed to respective application thresholds.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Monson teaches:
wherein the prescription map has a plurality of target soil characteristic profiles indexed to respective application thresholds (Monson, FIG. 1; col. 5, lines 34-37: “Referring back to FIG. 1, memory 18 includes three fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52 which store a predetermined desired distribution of each respective fertilizer [i.e., prescription map has a plurality of target soil characteristic profiles].”; col. 6, lines 22-33: “System 10 further comprises the plurality of fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52 shown as fertilizer map number 1, fertilizer map number 2 and fertilizer map number 3, respectively [i.e., a plurality of target soil characteristic profiles indexed to respective application thresholds], which are defined in partitioned memory 18. Each fertilizer map is independent from one another and corresponds to a particular portion of the field to be fertilized, similar to the soil map 26. Ideally, each fertilizer map is identically scaled and represents the exact same portion as the field soil map 26 so that, for instance, each corresponding pixel fertilizer and soil map corresponds to the same portion of land, thus providing an overlapping effect of information.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen, with the concept of an agricultural application system that uses a prescription map with a plurality of target soil characteristics profiles indexed to respective application thresholds, taught by Monson, in order to apply a target amount of different materials based on the variety of application needs of different types of soil (Monson, col. 1, lines 11-18: “Agricultural lands are typically comprised of several different soil types, each of which may be categorized according to the relative proportions of sand, clay and silt it contains. A typical agricultural field is usually fertilized with more than one blend of fertilizer, wherein the different soils and/or soil types absorb, release and otherwise react with the various fertilizer blends at differing rates.”; col. 2, lines 31-35: “It is a further object of the present invention to provide a variable rate application system capable of dispensing several different types of fertilizers and which takes into account the interaction between the several fertilizers.”).
Regarding claim 19, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 17, but do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
wherein the plurality of application thresholds comprise two or more target soil characteristic profiles including the active application threshold and at least one inactive application threshold, and the application control module is configured to determine the slurry application value based on the determined one or more slurry characteristics and the active application threshold.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Monson teaches:
wherein the plurality of application thresholds comprise two or more target soil characteristic profiles including the active application threshold and at least one inactive application threshold (Monson, col. 5, lines 34-37: “Referring back to FIG. 1, memory 18 includes three fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52 which store a predetermined desired distribution of each respective fertilizer [i.e., plurality of application thresholds comprise two or more target soil characteristic profiles].”; col. 8, lines 22-28: “Controller 12 then provides the appropriate output signals to the spreader and dispensing (not shown) system via a multichannel interface card 130 for spreading or dispensing the appropriate level of each fertilizer at that particular location of the field to attain the desired level of fertilizer shown in fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52 [i.e., including the active application threshold and at least one inactive application threshold].
”), and
the application control module is configured to determine the slurry application value based on the determined one or more slurry characteristics and the active application threshold (Monson, col. 10, lines 8-23: “Upon examining soil map 26 at step 212, and ascertaining at step 214 both the current levels of the respective fertilizers beneath the tractor 11 from status maps 80, 82, 84, and the desired levels of each of the fertilizers from the fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52, expert system 16 [i.e., application control module] at step 216 devises set point values [i.e., determine the slurry application value] to produce a set point map file at step 218. The set point map file is a file containing the set points of each of the fertilizer dispensers 13 corresponding to a predetermined speed for each location of the field to be fertilized, thus providing normalized values. A reference set point for each dispenser 13 is identified for each location of the field such that the desired fertilizer levels stored in fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52 will be attained [i.e., based on the determined one or more slurry characteristics and the active application threshold] when the tractor 11 is driven over the corresponding location of the field as sensed by position locator 20.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen, with the concept of an agricultural application system that uses a prescription map with a plurality of target soil characteristics profiles, including active and inactive application thresholds, taught by Monson, in order to apply a target amount of different materials based on the variety of application needs of different types of soil and directly control which of the plurality of characteristics is being addressed at a given location (Monson, col. 1, lines 11-18: “Agricultural lands are typically comprised of several different soil types, each of which may be categorized according to the relative proportions of sand, clay and silt it contains. A typical agricultural field is usually fertilized with more than one blend of fertilizer, wherein the different soils and/or soil types absorb, release and otherwise react with the various fertilizer blends at differing rates.”; col. 2, lines 31-35: “It is a further object of the present invention to provide a variable rate application system capable of dispensing several different types of fertilizers and which takes into account the interaction between the several fertilizers.”).
Regarding claim 20, Giles and Madsen teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 17, but do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
wherein the plurality of application thresholds are dynamic and correspondingly vary according to an initial soil characteristic profile, and the plurality of application thresholds are modified based on measured characteristics of soil to achieve adjusted application thresholds.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Monson teaches:
wherein the plurality of application thresholds are dynamic and correspondingly vary according to an initial soil characteristic profile (Monson, col. 8, lines 3-28: “As will be described shortly, as system 10 is driven throughout the field, or prior to a spreading application if the maps are not to be changed prior to application at the respective location, machine controller 12 will ascertain inputs corresponding to the current location of system 10 as provided by position locator 20 via line 22, the soil type provided by soil map 26, the desired fertilizer levels provided by each fertilizer map 36, 50 and 52, the current fertilizer levels provided by each status map 80, 82 and 84 [i.e., initial soil characteristic profile], and will ascertain the speed of the tractor 11 via a speed indicator 100, which is typically a radar based speed indicator that is well known in the art. Machine controller 12 will provide all this information corresponding to the current location of system 10 to the expert system 16. Expert system 16, as will be described shortly, ascertains and processes the databased on well known equations and data tables stored in memory which relate the two types and interactions of fertilizers and to the types of soil to subsequently, in real time, provide output signals back to controller 12. Controller 12 then provides the appropriate output signals to the spreader and dispensing (not shown) system via a multichannel interface card 130 for spreading or dispensing the appropriate level of each fertilizer at that particular location of the field to attain the desired level of fertilizer shown in fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52 [i.e., application thresholds are dynamic and correspondingly vary according to an initial soil characteristic profile].”), and
the plurality of application thresholds are modified based on measured characteristics of soil to achieve adjusted application thresholds (Monson, col. 5, lines 34-46: “Referring back to FIG. 1, memory 18 includes three fertilizer maps 36, 50 and 52 which store a predetermined desired distribution of each respective fertilizer. The distribution can be custom designed based on topography, soil type, the type of plants being farmed, drainage characteristics, sun exposure, or any number of factors which need to be accounted for to maximize the yield of the plants [i.e., based on measured characteristics of soil to achieve adjusted application thresholds]. (See FIGS. 3-5). Three digital fertilizer status maps 80, 82 and 84 are also stored in memory 18 and provide the existing levels of each respective fertilizer prior to a fertilizing operation, and which can be updated or tempered during a fertilizing run [i.e., plurality of application thresholds are modified]. (See FIGS. 6-8).”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen, with the concept of an agricultural application system that uses application thresholds that can be updated based on the initial conditions of the soil, taught by Monson, in order to apply a target amount of different materials based on the variety of application needs of different types of soil and directly control which of the plurality of characteristics is being addressed at a given location (Monson, col. 1, lines 11-18: “Agricultural lands are typically comprised of several different soil types, each of which may be categorized according to the relative proportions of sand, clay and silt it contains. A typical agricultural field is usually fertilized with more than one blend of fertilizer, wherein the different soils and/or soil types absorb, release and otherwise react with the various fertilizer blends at differing rates.”; col. 2, lines 31-35: “It is a further object of the present invention to provide a variable rate application system capable of dispensing several different types of fertilizers and which takes into account the interaction between the several fertilizers.”).
Claim(s) 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles, in view of Madsen and Monson, as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of WO-2015164791-A1, hereinafter “Huenemann” (previously of record).
Regarding claim 21, Giles, Madsen and Monson teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 20, but do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
further comprising a soil characteristic sensor configured for coupling with the prime mover, and the soil characteristic sensor is configured to measure the characteristics of the soil.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huenemann teaches:
further comprising a soil characteristic sensor configured for coupling with the prime mover, and the soil characteristic sensor is configured to measure the characteristics of the soil (Huenemann, FIG. 2; para. 0020: “FIG. 2 is a perspective view of an alternative embodiment of the agricultural system 10, in which the sensor 14 [i.e., a soil characteristic sensor] is coupled to the front end of the tow vehicle 12 [i.e., coupling with the prime mover], relative to the direction of travel 24. The sensor 14 may include at least one sensing device capable of determining a property of the agricultural field. For example, the sensor 14 may include a chemical soil analyzer, an acoustic soil analyzer, an electromagnetic analyzer, or the like [i.e., configured to measure the characteristics of the soil].”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen and Monson, with the concept of using a soil sensor coupled to a prime mover, to measure the characteristics of the soil for an agricultural application system, taught by Huenemann, in order to collect data about the characteristics of the soil in order to determine what or how much of the material to apply to the soil to improve operations and/or yield (Huenemann, para. 0023: “Because the sensor 14 monitors the soil before the agricultural implement 16 interacts with the soil, changes to agricultural operations may be implemented in real-time or near real-time to improve agricultural operations. For example, based on feedback from the sensor 14 more or fewer seeds may be deposited and/or more or less fertilizer may be applied to the agricultural field, thereby reducing costs and/or increasing yield.”).
Regarding claim 22, Giles, Madsen and Monson teach the agricultural slurry application system of claim 20, but do not appear to explicitly teach the following:
further comprising an in-ground soil characteristic sensor configured for communication with the soil, and the in-ground soil characteristic sensor is configured to measure the characteristics of the soil.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huenemann teaches:
further comprising an in-ground soil characteristic sensor configured for communication with the soil, and the in-ground soil characteristic sensor is configured to measure the characteristics of the soil (Huenemann, para. 0015: “The embodiments described herein relate to a system and method for sensor based crop management. In certain embodiments, a sensor (e.g., an acoustic analyzer, a chemical analyzer, an optical analyzer, an electromagnetic analyzer, etc.) is positioned proximate to or in contact with a surface of an agricultural field [i.e., an in-ground soil characteristic sensor]. The sensor is configured to output a signal indicative of a soil property of the agricultural field [i.e., configured to measure the characteristics of the soil].”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Giles, as modified by Madsen and Monson, with the concept of using an in-ground soil sensor to measure the characteristics of the soil for an agricultural application system, taught by Huenemann, in order to directly collect data about the characteristics of the soil in order to determine what or how much of the material to apply to the soil to improve operations and/or yield (Huenemann, para. 0023: “Because the sensor 14 monitors the soil before the agricultural implement 16 interacts with the soil, changes to agricultural operations may be implemented in real-time or near real-time to improve agricultural operations. For example, based on feedback from the sensor 14 more or fewer seeds may be deposited and/or more or less fertilizer may be applied to the agricultural field, thereby reducing costs and/or increasing yield.”).
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 Leah N Miller whose telephone number is (703)756-1933. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30am - 5:30pm ET.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached on (571) 270-5227. 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.
/L.N.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645