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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/19/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nafziger (US 20180132420 A1) in view of Babler (US 20210045292 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger discloses:
A windrower implement
See at least: "self-propelled windrower 10" ([0018])
Rationale: Nafziger describes a windrower implement.
comprising: a frame extending along a central longitudinal axis
See at least: "frame 15" ([0018]/Fig. 1)
Rationale: Nafziger discloses a frame 15 that inherently extends along a central longitudinal axis as part of the windrower structure, as shown in Figure 1.
between a forward end and a rearward end relative to a direction of travel during operation;
See at least: "harvesting header 14 attached to a frame 15…header 14 includes a cutter 18 for severing standing crops as the machine moves through the field, conditioning mechanism in the form of a pair of conditioner rolls 20, and may include a pair of rearwardly converging windrow forming shields 22 behind the conditioner rolls 20 ([0018])
Rationale: The frame has a forward end where the header is attached and a rearward end relative to direction of travel during operation.
an implement head attached to the frame proximate the forward end thereof,
See at least: "harvesting header 14 attached to a frame 15 of the tractor 12" ([0018]/Fig. 1)
Rationale: The implement head (header 14) is attached to the frame 15 proximate the forward end thereof.
wherein the implement head is operable to cut standing crop material
See at least: "cutter 18 for severing standing crops" ([0018])
Rationale: The implement head cuts standing crop material.
and discharge cut crop material in a rearward direction along the central longitudinal axis;
See at least: "the conditioner rolls 20 have the characteristic of projecting a stream of conditioned materials rearwardly therefrom and toward the swathboard 24 as the crop materials issue from the rolls 20." ([0019])
Rationale: The implement head discharges cut crop material in a rearward direction along the central longitudinal axis.
a merger attachment coupled to the frame rearward of the implement head,
See at least: "merger attachment 26 comprising a conveyor frame 28 coupled to the windrower" ([0020])
Rationale: The merger attachment 26 is coupled to the frame rearward of the implement head.
wherein the merger attachment includes a conveyor
See at least: "conveyor 30 that receives the cut crop discharged from the header 14" ([0020])
Rationale: The merger attachment includes a conveyor 30.
moveable between a deployed position in which the conveyor is positioned relative to the implement head
See at least: "lowered, operational position" ([0021])
Rationale: The conveyor is moveable between a deployed position in which it is positioned relative to the implement head.
to receive discharged crop material from the implement head
See at least: "in which the crop material coming from the conditioner rolls 20 is directed rearward…lands on the conveyor 30" ([0021])
Rationale: In the deployed position, the conveyor receives discharged crop material from the implement head.
and convey the crop material laterally relative to the central longitudinal axis
See at least: "direct the crop material to a side of the windrower" ([0007])
Rationale: The conveyor conveys the crop material laterally relative to the central longitudinal axis.
to form a windrow laterally offset from the central longitudinal axis,
See at least: "form a windrow on the ground to the side of the windrower" ([0007])
Rationale: This forms a windrow laterally offset from the central longitudinal axis.
and a stowed position in which the conveyor is positioned relative to the implement head
See at least: "The conveyor frame 28 of the merger attachment 26 is positionable between a raised position as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3 in which the conveyor 30 is positioned above and out of the way of the stream of crop material coming from the conditioner rolls 20" ([0021])
Rationale: The conveyor is in a stowed position in which it is positioned relative to the implement head.
to not receive discharged crop material from the implement head
See at least: "…in which the conveyor 30 is positioned above and out of the way of the stream of crop material coming from the conditioner rolls 20" ([0021])
Rationale: In the stowed position, the conveyor does not receive discharged crop material from the implement head.
to form the windrow substantially aligned with the central longitudinal axis along a center line of the frame;
See at least: "discharges cut crop onto the field in between the front wheels of the windrower 10" ([0029])
Rationale: This forms a windrow substantially aligned with the central longitudinal axis along a center line of the frame.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
a merger controller having a processor and a memory having a merger control algorithm stored thereon,
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to: determine a location of a windrow formed during a belly pass
and save the location of the windrow formed during the belly pass in the memory as a windrow track location;
when executing a merger pass adjacent to the belly pass, determine a current position of the conveyor relative to the windrow track location of the belly pass;
and control a current speed of the conveyor based on the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor
to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
a merger controller having a processor and a memory having a merger control algorithm stored thereon,
See at least: "merger control system 1100" including "data analyzer 1114" and "database 1116" ([0151])
Rationale: Babler discloses a merger controller with a processor (as part of the system) and a memory (database 1116) having a merger control algorithm stored thereon.
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to: determine a location of a windrow formed during a belly pass
See at least: "determined location of the fourth windrow 124 and/or a determined location of the fifth windrow 126" ([0173])
Rationale: Babler's controller determines a location of a windrow formed during a belly pass (where the "belly pass" concept is supplied by Nafziger).
and save the location of the windrow formed during the belly pass in the memory as a windrow track location;
See at least: "database 1116 ... stores ... at least a portion of the data" including windrow locations ([0174])
Rationale: The controller saves the location of the windrow in the memory as a windrow track location.
when executing a merger pass adjacent to the belly pass, determine a current position of the conveyor relative to the windrow track location of the belly pass;
See at least: "controller 104 determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168" ([0052])
Rationale: Babler's controller determines a current position of the conveyor relative to the windrow track location of the belly pass (using completed windrows as track locations)
and control a current speed of the conveyor based on the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor
See at least: "the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds. In such examples, the conveyor interface 1104 directs a conveyor actuator 108 to operate a belt 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at the aforementioned first belt speed and/or within a first example range of belt speeds (e.g., about 15 feet per second or more)" ([0158])
Rationale: Babler's controller controls a current speed of the conveyor based on the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor (as part of its control logic for material deposition).
to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor.
See at least: "controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 ... by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168" ([0052])
Rationale: By controlling conveyor speed to deposit material at specific locations, Babler achieves a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to integrate Babler's GPS-based windrow tracking and conveyor speed control into Nafziger's windrower to automate the belly-pass/merger-pass operation. Both references relate to agricultural windrow-forming equipment, and combining Babler's advanced control system with Nafziger's mechanical windrower structure would yield predictable benefits, including reduced operator workload, improved consistency in windrow placement, and increased overall harvesting efficiency.
Regarding Claim 2,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 2.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to calculate the desired throw distance
from the windrow track location of the belly pass
and the current position of the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to calculate the desired throw distance from the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor.
See at least: "records... a location of the fourth windrow 124 and/or a location of the fifth windrow 126... stores the location(s) in the database 1116" ([0173]) and "the merger control system 1100... increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114" ([0203])
See at least: "controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124... by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168" ([0052])
Rationale: Babler's processor executes the merger control algorithm to determine adjustments for conveyor actuators based on stored windrow locations and current conveyor position to achieve desired material deposition. In view of Nafziger's belly-pass windrow and corresponding track location, it would have been obvious to configure the processor to calculate the desired throw distance from the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler's location-based control logic using stored windrow locations and conveyor position in Nafziger's windrower, which would inherently involve calculating a throw distance to achieve accurate windrow formation in the context of Nafziger's belly-pass/merger-pass operation, resulting in improved operational efficiency and consistent windrow placement.
Regarding Claim 2,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 2.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to calculate the desired throw distance
from the windrow track location of the belly pass
and the current position of the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to calculate the desired throw distance
See at least: "the merger control system 1100 ... increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114" ([0203])
Rationale: Babler's control system achieves desired material deposition through speed adjustments, such that it would have been obvious to configure the processor to calculate the desired throw distance.
from the windrow track location of the belly pass
See at least: "a determined location of the fourth windrow 124 and/or a determined location of the fifth windrow 126" ([0173]) and "The database 1116 ... stores ... at least a portion of the data" ([0174])
Rationale: Babler stores windrow track location of windrows formed during passes, which corresponds to the belly pass concept from Nafziger.
and the current position of the conveyor.
See at least: "controller 104 determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168" ([0052])
Rationale: This determination involves the current position of the conveyor relative to stored windrow locations.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler's location-based control logic using stored windrow locations and conveyor position in Nafziger's windrower, which would inherently involve calculating a throw distance from the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current conveyor position to achieve accurate windrow formation in the context of Nafziger's belly-pass/merger-pass operation, resulting in improved operational efficiency and consistent windrow placement.
Regarding Claim 3,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 2, which is the basis for Claim 3.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to calculate the desired throw distance
by calculating a perpendicular distance
between the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to calculate the desired throw distance
See at least: "the merger control system 1100 ... increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114" ([0203])
Rationale: Babler's control system achieves desired material deposition through speed adjustments, such that it would have been obvious to configure the processor to calculate the desired throw distance.
by calculating a perpendicular distance
See at least: "controller 104 determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168" ([0052])
Rationale: Babler's controller determines adjustments for material deposition relative to stored windrow locations, and in view of the lateral displacement involved in windrow formation, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the processor by calculating a perpendicular distance as a straightforward geometric determination.
between the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor.
See at least: "a determined location of the fourth windrow 124 and/or a determined location of the fifth windrow 126" ([0173]) and "The database 1116 ... stores ... at least a portion of the data" ([0174]) and "controller 104 determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168" ([0052])
Rationale: Babler stores the windrow track location of windrows formed during passes, and a PHOSITA would understand that the controller uses this stored location, along with the current position of the conveyor (via positioning adjustments), for deposition control.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler's location-based control logic in Nafziger's windrower, where calculating a perpendicular distance between the stored windrow track location and the current conveyor position is a predictable and obvious method for determining the desired throw distance in the belly-pass/merger-pass operation, resulting in precise windrow placement and operational efficiency.
Regarding Claim 4,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 2, which is the basis for Claim 4.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to define a desired speed based on the desired throw distance
and a current mass flow rate of the crop material
currently being moved by the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to define a desired speed based on the desired throw distance
See at least: "conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to control respective speeds of the belts" ([0157]) and "the merger control system 1100 ... increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114" ([0203])
Rationale: Babler's controller defines conveyor speeds to achieve desired deposition locations, such that it would have been obvious to configure the processor to define a desired speed based on the desired throw distance.
and a current mass flow rate of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor.
See at least: "sensor(s) 150 are configured to generate sensor data associated with the material 114 during merger operation" including parameters such as "a size or volume, a density" ([0166]) and "controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 ... by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168" ([0052])
Rationale: Babler's system monitors material parameters, including volume and density, during operation, and a PHOSITA would understand that these parameters relate to mass flow rate and would be used by the controller in defining conveyor speed adjustments.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler's conveyor speed control system in Nafziger's windrower, where defining a desired speed based on both the desired throw distance and current mass flow rate is a predictable and obvious method for maintaining consistent windrow formation in the belly-pass/merger-pass operation, resulting in improved material handling efficiency and deposition accuracy.
Regarding Claim 5,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 4, which is the basis for Claim 5.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to control the current speed of the conveyor
to achieve the desired speed.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to control the current speed of the conveyor
See at least: "conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) ... at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds" ([0158])
Rationale: Babler's processor control[s] the current speed of the conveyor through the conveyor interface and actuators.
to achieve the desired speed.
See at least: "conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) ... at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds" ([0158])
Rationale: Babler's controller operates the conveyor at specific speeds to achieve the desired speed as part of its control logic.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler's conveyor speed control system in Nafziger's windrower, where controlling the current conveyor speed to achieve a desired speed is a fundamental and predictable aspect of automated conveyor operation in the belly-pass/merger-pass context, resulting in precise speed management and consistent windrow formation.
Regarding Claim 6,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement set forth in claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 6.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to define a baseline speed of the conveyor
for a baseline throw distance
and a baseline crop mass flow rate.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to define a baseline speed of the conveyor
See at least: “the conveyor interface 1104 … directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds” ([0158]).
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]).
Rationale: Babler teaches that the controller 104, via conveyor interface 1104, operates the conveyor belt(s) at particular speeds and/or within particular ranges of speeds, and increases or decreases the speed to achieve desired material deposition. A PHOSITA would recognize that such a system necessarily defines a reference or baseline speed of the conveyor from which increases or decreases are made, and that this baseline speed is part of the merger control algorithm executed by the processor.
for a baseline throw distance
See at least: “increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]) and “controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 … by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: Babler describes controlling belt speed so that the material 114 is deposited at a desired or final location on the ground relative to completed windrows 168. A PHOSITA would understand that this corresponds to a throw distance determined by conveyor speed and geometry. Defining a baseline conveyor speed and a baseline throw distance (e.g., a nominal distance at which material is deposited when operating at the default speed) is straightforward and predictable, and it follows the same control logic described in Babler.
and a baseline crop mass flow rate.
See at least: “the sensor(s) 150 are configured to provide signals representative of operating parameters associated with the merger 102 and/or the material 114” ([0048]) and “the sensor data 1126 … includes one or more parameters associated with the material 114 such as, for example, any of a shape, a size or volume, a density, a moisture content…” ([0166]).
Rationale: Babler teaches that sensor(s) 150 and sensor data 1126 provide parameters of material 114, including size or volume and density, which are standard inputs from which mass flow rate can be derived (mass per unit time) in a conveyor system. A PHOSITA would understand that the merger control algorithm can use these parameters to characterize a baseline crop mass flow rate (a nominal throughput condition) corresponding to the baseline operating point. Thus, in combination, Babler makes it obvious for the processor to define a baseline speed of the conveyor for a baseline throw distance and a baseline crop mass flow rate as part of the control strategy.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler’s merger control system in Nafziger’s windrower such that the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm to define a baseline speed of the conveyor for a baseline throw distance and a baseline crop mass flow rate. Nafziger provides the self-propelled windrower with header and merger attachment operating in belly-pass and merger-pass patterns, where consistent windrow placement is important. Babler provides a processor-based control system that uses sensor data representing material parameters and operates the conveyor belt(s) at specific speeds or within speed ranges to achieve desired deposition locations. For a PHOSITA, defining a baseline speed, baseline throw distance, and baseline crop mass flow rate as the nominal operating point of this control system is a routine, predictable engineering practice that facilitates subsequent adjustments for varying field and crop conditions, improving the stability and consistency of windrow formation.
Regarding Claim 7,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 6, which is the basis for Claim 7.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to define the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
when the desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to define the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114.” ([0203]); and “the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds.” ([0158])
Rationale: In Claim 6, the baseline speed of the conveyor is defined for a baseline operating condition. Babler further explains that the system increases or decreases belt speed to reach a desired or final location. A PHOSITA would understand that, when moving from a baseline condition to a new desired throw distance, the desired speed is chosen relative to that baseline. In particular, to increase the throw (i.e., project material farther), the system must increase belt speed above the baseline speed, thereby defining the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed.
when the desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance.
See at least: the same control behavior in which “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114.” ([0203]); and “controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 … by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168.” ([0052])
Rationale: Babler describes selecting and adjusting belt speed specifically to change where material lands relative to completed windrows, i.e., to change the location (effective throw distance) of deposition. Given the baseline condition of Claim 6 (with a baseline throw distance), a PHOSITA would recognize that when a desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance, the physical relationship between projectile range and conveyor speed requires a higher belt speed. Thus, the processor executing the merger control algorithm logically defines the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed when the desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance in order to achieve the further deposition location.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to incorporate Babler’s speed-adjustment logic into Nafziger’s windrower such that, once a baseline speed of the conveyor and corresponding baseline throw distance are established, the merger control algorithm increases belt speed whenever a further windrow placement is desired. Both references address conveyor-based forage handling and windrow positioning; using higher belt speed to obtain a greater throw distance is a straightforward, predictable application of Babler’s disclosed “increases or decreases the speed … to vary the deposition” behavior in the belly-pass/merger-pass context, resulting in obvious and expected improvements in control of windrow placement.
Regarding Claim 8,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 6, which is the basis for Claim 8.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to define the desired speed
to be less than the baseline speed
when the desired throw distance is less than the baseline throw distance.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to define the desired speed
See at least: “the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds.” ([0158])
Rationale: By directing the conveyor belt(s) to operate at particular speeds and within ranges of speeds, the merger control algorithm specifies a desired speed for the conveyor under given conditions.
to be less than the baseline speed
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114.” ([0203])
Rationale: In view of Claim 6, a baseline speed of the conveyor is defined for a baseline operating point. Babler further states that the system decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to change material deposition. A PHOSITA would understand that when the system decreases belt speed from the previously established baseline operating point, the desired speed is thereby less than the baseline speed as part of the merger control algorithm.
when the desired throw distance is less than the baseline throw distance.
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114.” ([0203]); and “controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 … by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168.” ([0052])
Rationale: Babler explains that changing belt speed varies the deposition location of material relative to completed windrows. Given the baseline condition of Claim 6 (with a baseline throw distance), a PHOSITA would recognize that achieving a desired throw distance that is less than the baseline throw distance requires reducing belt speed. Physically, shorter projection distance corresponds to a lower belt speed, so the algorithm defines the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed when the desired throw distance is less than the baseline throw distance.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to incorporate Babler’s speed-adjustment control into Nafziger’s windrower such that, after establishing a baseline speed of the conveyor, baseline throw distance, and baseline crop mass flow rate, the merger control algorithm reduces belt speed whenever a closer windrow placement is desired. Both references address conveyor-based forage handling and windrow positioning; using a lower belt speed to obtain a shorter throw distance is a straightforward and predictable application of Babler’s “increases or decreases the speed … to vary the deposition” behavior in the belly-pass / merger-pass context, yielding obvious and expected improvements in fine control of windrow placement.
Regarding Claim 9,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 6, which is the basis for Claim 9.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to define the desired speed
to be greater than the baseline speed
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is greater than the baseline crop volume.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to define the desired speed
See at least: “the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds.” ([0158])
Rationale: Directing the belts to particular speeds corresponds to the algorithm defining the desired speed.
to be greater than the baseline speed
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114.” ([0203])
Rationale: When the system increases belt speed from the baseline condition of Claim 6, the desired speed is greater than the baseline speed.
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is greater than the baseline crop volume.
See at least: “detecting parameter(s) associated with the material 114 via the sensor(s) 150 … including a size or volume, a density …” ([0166], [0185]); and “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114.” ([0203])
Rationale: Volume and density measurements during conveying allow a PHOSITA to derive a current mass flow rate and compare it to a baseline condition (baseline crop quantity). When the current mass flow rate exceeds that baseline, increasing belt speed to maintain placement corresponds to defining the desired speed to be higher in response to higher flow, i.e., when a current mass flow rate … is greater than the baseline crop volume.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to use Babler’s sensor-based, speed-adjustment control in Nafziger’s windrower so that conveyor speed automatically increases when more crop is delivered. Both address conveyor-based windrow formation and adjusting the speed upward when the current mass flow rate exceeds a baseline to maintain a consistent windrow, making this a straightforward, predictable control strategy.
Regarding Claim 10,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 6, which is the basis for Claim 10.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to define the desired speed
to be less than the baseline speed
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to define the desired speed
See at least: “the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds.” ([0158])
Rationale: Commanding the belts to particular speeds corresponds to the algorithm defining the desired speed of the conveyor.
to be less than the baseline speed
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114.” ([0203])
Rationale: Relative to the baseline speed of Claim 6, when the system decreases belt speed, the desired speed is less than the baseline speed.
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
See at least: “detecting parameter(s) associated with the material during operation of the merger via sensor(s)” ([0185]) including “a size or volume, a density …” ([0166]); and “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114.” ([0203])
Rationale: Volume and density measurements during conveying allow a PHOSITA to derive a current mass flow rate and compare it to the baseline crop mass flow rate from Claim 6. When the current mass flow rate … is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate, reducing belt speed to keep a uniform, non-sparse windrow corresponds to defining the desired speed lower than the baseline.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to use Babler’s sensor-based speed-adjustment control in Nafziger’s windrower so that conveyor speed is reduced when less crop is being conveyed. Both references address conveyor-based windrow formation; lowering speed when current mass flow rate drops below a baseline crop mass flow rate to maintain windrow quality is a straightforward, predictable control choice.
Regarding Claim 11,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 11.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
further comprising a flow sensor
operable to detect data
related to a mass flow rate
of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
further comprising a flow sensor
See at least: “sensor(s) 150 are configured to generate sensor data associated with the material 114 during merger operation …” ([0048])
Rationale: Babler’s sensor(s) 150 are additional components on the merger system that sense material on the merger, corresponding to further comprising a flow sensor.
operable to detect data
See at least: “sensor(s) 150 are configured to generate sensor data associated with the material 114 during merger operation …” ([0048])
Rationale: Generating sensor data shows the sensor is operable to detect data.
related to a mass flow rate
See at least: “…sensor data…indicative of one or more parameters associated …a size or volume, a density…” ([0166])
Rationale: Measured volume and density are standard inputs from which a PHOSITA derives mass flow rate, so the detected parameters are data related to a mass flow rate.
of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor.
See at least: “the controller 104 is configured to control, via the conveyor actuator(s) 108, the belt(s) 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 such that a conveyor speed associated with the conveyor 134 varies…in which the material 114 is being discharged or conveyed by the conveyor 134” ([0102])
Rationale: The sensors measure parameters of material 114 while it is on the operating conveyor, corresponding to data for the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to add Babler’s sensor(s) to Nafziger’s windrower so the system can monitor crop flow on the conveyor. Both references concern conveyor-based crop merging; incorporating sensors that detect parameters related to mass flow rate into Nafziger’s machine is a straightforward, predictable enhancement that improves control of windrow formation.
Regarding Claim 12,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 12.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
further comprising a location sensor
operable to detect data
related to a location of the conveyor
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to determine a current location of the conveyor
from the data detected by the location sensor
Disclosure by Babler
Babler discloses:
further comprising a location sensor
See at least: "sensor(s) 150" which include "one or more GPS locators" ([0048])
Rationale: Babler's GPS locators constitute a location sensor on the merger system
operable to detect data
See at least: "sensor(s) 150 are configured to generate sensor data associated with the material 114 during merger operation" ([0048])
Rationale: Generating sensor data shows the sensor is operable to detect data
related to a location of the conveyor
See at least: "recording ... a location of the fourth windrow 124 and/or a location of the fifth windrow 126 based on at least some (e.g., GPS data or coordinates) of the sensor data 1126" ([0188])
Rationale: GPS data detecting windrow locations inherently provides data related to a location of the conveyor since the conveyor deposits the windrows
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: "The program may be embodied in software stored on a tangible machine-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, a floppy disk, a hard drive, or a memory associated with the processor 1702, but the entire program and/or parts thereof could be alternatively executed by a different device and/or embodied in firmware or dedicated hardware" ([0178])
Rationale: Babler's processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to determine a current location of the conveyor
See at least: "controller 104 determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168" ([0052])
Rationale: A PHOSITA would understand that determining adjustments for positioning windrows relative to completed windrows requires the processor to determine a current location of the conveyor as an obvious and necessary inference from the disclosed control logic
from the data detected by the location sensor
See at least: "records ... a location of the fourth windrow 124 and/or a location of the fifth windrow 126 based on at least some (e.g., GPS data or coordinates) of the sensor data 1126" ([0188])
Rationale: The controller uses GPS data from the location sensor to determine windrow locations, which inherently requires determining the conveyor's location from the data detected by the location sensor
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to incorporate Babler's location sensing and processing technology into Nafziger's windrower to enable position-based control. Both references address windrow-forming equipment, and using GPS location data to determine conveyor position for automated windrow placement is a predictable enhancement that would be obvious to implement to improve operational precision in the belly-pass/merger-pass context.
Regarding Claim 14,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the windrower implement of Claim 13, which is the basis for Claim 14.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
to: define the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is greater than the baseline crop mass flow rate;
and define the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed
when the current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler provides teachings for the following missing elements:
wherein the processor is operable to execute the merger control algorithm
See at least: “Coded instruction(s) 1706 to implement the methods of FIGS. 12–16 are stored in a main memory 1708 and are executed by a processor such as the processor 1702.” ([0226]; see also [0178])
Rationale: Processor 1702 executing coded instructions 1706 that implement the merger methods corresponds to a processor that is operable to execute the merger control algorithm.
to: define the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114.” ([0203])
Rationale: When the conveyor speed is increased from an initial operating speed (the baseline established in Claim 13), the algorithm defines the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed.
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is greater than the baseline crop mass flow rate;
See at least: “The sensor interface 1110 … receive[s] sensor data 1126” in which “at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 is indicative of one or more of a location (e.g., a global location), a shape, a size or volume, a density…” ([0166]); and “The example method 1200 of FIG. 12 also includes detecting parameters associated with the material 114” including parameters such as size/volume and density ([0185]).
Rationale: Size/volume and density of material 114 on the conveyor allow a PHOSITA to compute a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor and compare it to the baseline crop mass flow rate (from Claim 13). It would be an obvious control strategy to define the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed when a current mass flow rate … is greater than the baseline crop mass flow rate so that a higher mass flow still reaches the desired throw distance.
and define the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306” to vary deposition ([0203]).
Rationale: When the conveyor speed is decreased from the baseline speed, the algorithm defines the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed.
when the current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
See at least: “sensor(s) 150 … generate sensor data 1126” indicative of size/volume and density of material 114 ([0166]); “detecting parameters associated with the material 114” in method 1200 ([0185]); together with adjustment of belt speed to achieve desired deposition ([0203]).
Rationale: Using the same mass-related parameters, a PHOSITA would recognize that when the current mass flow rate is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate, the system can maintain the same throw distance by defining the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed (less material requires less speed to reach the same range), so the merger control algorithm naturally implements this relationship.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to extend Babler’s conveyor-speed control in Nafziger’s windrower so that the desired speed is adjusted not only based on throw-distance targets (Claim 13) but also based on current mass flow rate measured from sensor data 1126 relative to a baseline crop mass flow rate. Both references address merger conveyors handling varying crop flows; using mass-flow measurements to increase speed when flow is higher than baseline and decrease speed when flow is lower is a straightforward, predictable enhancement to maintain consistent windrow formation, and thus renders Claim 14 obvious.
Regarding Claim 15,
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger teaches:
A method of controlling a merger attachment of a windrower implement,
See at least: “In one example windrower operation, during one pass across the field…” ([0029]); “The windrower 10 has a merger attachment 26 comprising a conveyor frame 28” ([0020]).
Rationale: Nafziger describes an example windrower operation of a windrower 10 having a merger attachment 26, which is a method of controlling a merger attachment of a windrower implement.
the merger attachment
See at least: “The windrower 10 has a merger attachment 26” ([0020]).
Rationale: Nafziger expressly identifies the merger attachment 26.
including a conveyor
See at least: “merger attachment 26 comprising a conveyor frame 28 … a conveyor 30” ([0020]).
Rationale: Merger attachment 26 includes a conveyor 30, thus including a conveyor.
for discharging crop material,
See at least: “conveyor 30 that receives the cut crop discharged from the header 14” ([0020]); “the crop material coming from the conditioner rolls 20 is directed rearward… lands on the conveyor 30” ([0021]); “discharges cut crop onto the field in between the front wheels of the windrower 10” ([0029]).
Rationale: Conveyor 30 receives crop and discharges cut crop onto the field, so it is for discharging crop material.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly teach:
the method comprising: determining a location of a windrow formed during a belly pass with a merger controller,
and saving the location of the windrow formed during the belly pass in a memory of the merger controller as a windrow track location;
identifying execution of a merger pass adjacent to the belly pass with the merger controller;
determining a current position of the conveyor
relative to the windrow track location of the belly pass,
when executing the merger pass, with the merger controller;
and controlling a current speed of the conveyor with the merger controller
based on the windrow track location of the belly pass
and the current position of the conveyor
to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler teaches:
the method comprising: determining a location of a windrow formed during a belly pass with a merger controller,
See at least: “FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an example merger control system 1100” including “merger controller 104” ([0151]); and “The example method 1200 of FIG. 12 also includes recording locations of the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 based on at least some (e.g., GPS data or coordinates) of the sensor data 1126” ([0188]).
Rationale: Merger controller 104 in merger control system 1100 executes method 1200 and record[s] locations of the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 based on GPS data. In view of Nafziger’s first “belly pass” that forms a windrow between the wheels, a PHOSITA would treat this as determining a location of a windrow formed during a belly pass with a merger controller.
and saving the location of the windrow formed during the belly pass in a memory of the merger controller as a windrow track location;
See at least: “The database 1116 of FIG. 11 stores (e.g., temporarily and/or permanently) at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 and/or other data” ([0174]); and the same “recording locations of the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126…” ([0188]).
Rationale: Database 1116, as part of merger control system 1100, stores the recorded windrow locations, so the merger controller sav[es] the location of the windrow … in a memory of the merger controller as a windrow track location.
identifying execution of a merger pass adjacent to the belly pass with the merger controller;
See at least: “the merger controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168” ([0052]); and “recording locations of the … completed windrow(s) 168” ([0188]).
Rationale: Merger controller 104 uses recorded locations of completed windrows 168 and positions output windrows 124, 126 relative to those completed windrows. In combination with Nafziger’s first “belly pass” and subsequent merging passes adjacent to that pass, a PHOSITA would understand that the controller logically identifies execution of a merger pass adjacent to the belly pass with the merger controller whenever the current operation involves forming output windrows relative to the previously recorded belly-pass windrow.
determining a current position of the conveyor
See at least: “The sensor interface 1110 … facilitates interactions and/or communications between at least some of the sensor(s) 150 and the merger control system 1100” and “at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 is indicative of one or more parameters associated with the material 114 such as … a location (e.g., a global location)” ([0166]); and “controller 104 determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: GPS-related sensor data 1126 provide location information, and merger controller 104 uses this data to determine how to adjust conveyor actuator(s) for proper positioning. A PHOSITA would understand that this requires determining a current position of the conveyor as part of the control loop.
relative to the windrow track location of the belly pass,
See at least: “recording locations of the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 based on at least some (e.g., GPS data or coordinates) of the sensor data 1126” ([0188]); and “determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: Babler’s system records windrow locations and positions subsequent output windrows relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168. When the completed windrow is the “belly pass” windrow of Nafziger, this corresponds to determining the conveyor’s current position relative to the windrow track location of the belly pass.
when executing the merger pass, with the merger controller;
See at least: same passages describing controller 104 controlling conveyor 134 to form output windrows relative to completed windrows 168 ([0052], [0188]).
Rationale: These operations occur during passes where output windrows are formed alongside previously completed windrows; in the combined Nafziger–Babler system, this is when executing the merger pass, with the merger controller.
and controlling a current speed of the conveyor with the merger controller
See at least: “the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds” ([0158]); “adjusting output(s) of the conveyor interface 1104 … such that the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306” ([0203]); “the merger controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108” ([0052]).
Rationale: Merger controller 104, via conveyor interface 1104 and conveyor actuator(s) 108, controls a current speed of the conveyor.
based on the windrow track location of the belly pass
See at least: “recording locations of the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 based on at least some (e.g., GPS data or coordinates) of the sensor data 1126” ([0188]); “The database 1116 … stores … at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 and/or other data” ([0174]); and “determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126 relative to the respective ones of the completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: The controller uses stored windrow locations in database 1116 (windrow track locations) to calculate actuator adjustments. When the stored location is that of Nafziger’s belly-pass windrow, the controller is controlling a current speed of the conveyor … based on the windrow track location of the belly pass.
and the current position of the conveyor
See at least: “sensor data 1126 … indicative of … a location (e.g., a global location)” ([0166]); and “determines one or more adjustment(s) for the conveyor actuator(s) 108 associated with such positioning of the output windrow(s) 124, 126” ([0052]).
Rationale: Positioning logic necessarily uses both the stored windrow location and the current conveyor location. Thus, the controller adjusts belt speed and actuator outputs based on … the current position of the conveyor as inferred from location-related sensor data.
to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor.
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]); and “controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 … by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrows 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: By increasing or decreasing belt speed to adjust where material 114 lands relative to completed windrows, the controller sets the belt speed to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler’s location-based conveyor-control method (recording windrow locations, storing them in database 1116, determining conveyor position from sensor data 1126, and adjusting conveyor speed via controller 104 to achieve desired deposition locations) in the context of Nafziger’s windrower belly-pass / merger-pass operation. Both references concern windrowers with merger attachments and conveyors handling forage crops; extending Babler’s method so that the windrow track location corresponds to the belly-pass windrow in Nafziger and controlling belt speed in merger passes adjacent to that windrow is a predictable, routine application of known merger control techniques, rendering Claim 15 obvious in view of Nafziger in combination with Babler.
Regarding Claim 16,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the method of Claim 15, which is the basis for Claim 16.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly teach:
further comprising calculating the desired throw distance
from the windrow track location of the belly pass
and the current position of the conveyor with the merger controller.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler teaches:
further comprising calculating the desired throw distance
See at least: “The example method 1200 of FIG. 12 also includes recording locations of the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 based on at least some (e.g., GPS data or coordinates) of the sensor data 1126” ([0188]); and “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]).
Rationale: Method 1200 records windrow locations and method 1206 varies belt speed to reach a desired location. A PHOSITA would understand that, in order to choose the appropriate belt speed, the merger controller must calculate the desired throw distance (the distance from the conveyor to the desired deposition location) as a control variable, even though the exact phrase “desired throw distance” does not appear in Babler.
from the windrow track location of the belly pass
See at least: “recording locations of the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 based on at least some (e.g., GPS data or coordinates) of the sensor data 1126” ([0188]); “The database 1116 of FIG. 11 stores (e.g., temporarily and/or permanently) at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 and/or other data” ([0174]).
Rationale: Babler records and stores the locations of completed windrows in database 1116. In the combined system, the windrow laid down in Nafziger’s belly pass is one of these recorded windrows, i.e., a windrow track location of the belly pass. A PHOSITA would therefore compute the desired throw distance from the windrow track location of the belly pass as stored location data.
and the current position of the conveyor with the merger controller.
See at least: “The sensor interface 1110 of FIG. 11 facilitates interactions and/or communications between at least some of the sensor(s) 150 and the merger control system 1100” ([0166]); “at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 is indicative of one or more parameters associated with the material 114 such as, for example, a location (e.g., a global location)” ([0166]); and “the merger controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: GPS-based sensor data 1126 provides global location, and merger controller 104 uses this data when positioning output windrows relative to stored windrow locations. A PHOSITA would recognize that the controller necessarily derives the current position of the conveyor (via the machine’s known geometry and GPS location) and, together with the stored windrow track location, calculates the desired throw distance … from the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor with the merger controller, even though Babler does not recite that calculation in those exact words.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to extend Babler’s location-based control so that, in Nafziger’s belly-pass / merger-pass operation, the merger controller uses stored belly-pass windrow locations and the current conveyor position (from GPS-based sensor data 1126) to calculate the desired throw distance from the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor with the merger controller. This is a straightforward geometric calculation that predictably supports the existing Babler logic of adjusting belt speed to achieve a desired deposition location, rendering Claim 16 obvious.
Regarding Claim 17,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the method of Claim 16, which is the basis for Claim 17.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly teach:
further comprising defining a desired speed of the conveyor with the merger controller based on the desired throw distance
and a current mass flow rate of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler teaches:
further comprising defining a desired speed of the conveyor with the merger controller based on the desired throw distance
See at least: “the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds” ([0158]); and “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]); and “controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 … by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: Merger controller 104, through conveyor interface 1104, selects specific belt speeds to reach a desired or final location of material 114 relative to stored windrow locations. A PHOSITA would recognize that the distance between the conveyor and the desired deposition location is the desired throw distance, and that the controller defines the conveyor speed with the merger controller based on the desired throw distance so that the material lands at the commanded location.
and a current mass flow rate of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor.
See at least: “sensor(s) 150 are configured to generate sensor data 1126” and “at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 is indicative of one or more parameters associated with the material 114 such as, for example, a location (e.g., a global location), a shape, a size or volume, a density” ([0166]); and “The example method 1200 of FIG. 12 also includes detecting parameters associated with the material 114” ([0185]); together with the speed-adjustment control “increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]).
Rationale: From the detected size or volume and density of material 114 on the moving conveyor, the merger controller can compute a current mass flow rate of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor (mass per unit time). A PHOSITA would obviously configure the control algorithm to take this current mass flow rate into account when selecting belt speed to maintain the same desired throw distance despite changes in flow. Thus, Babler supports defining a desired speed of the conveyor with the merger controller based on the desired throw distance and a current mass flow rate of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to extend the combined method of Claim 16 so that the merger controller uses both the desired throw distance (from stored windrow track locations and the current conveyor position) and the current mass flow rate of the crop material currently being moved by the conveyor (from sensor data 1126 indicating size/volume and density) to define a desired speed of the conveyor. This is a straightforward refinement that adjusts belt speed as a function of both range and flow to maintain consistent windrow formation, rendering Claim 17 obvious.
Regarding Claim 18,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the method of Claim 17, which is the basis for Claim 18.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly teach:
wherein controlling the current speed of the conveyor based on the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor includes controlling the current speed of the conveyor with the merger controller
to achieve the desired speed of the conveyor.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler teaches:
wherein controlling the current speed of the conveyor based on the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor includes controlling the current speed of the conveyor with the merger controller
See at least:
“FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an example merger control system 1100” including “merger controller 104,” “conveyor 134,” and “conveyor interface 1104” ([0151]);
“In some examples, the merger controller 104 controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 and/or the fifth windrow 126 by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]);
“In some examples, the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds” ([0158]);
“The example method 1206 of FIG. 13 also includes adjusting output(s) of the conveyor interface 1104 such that the merger control system 1100 increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]).
Rationale: These passages show that the merger controller 104 (in merger control system 1100), via conveyor interface 1104 and conveyor actuator(s) 108, controls the conveyor 134 at particular speeds so that material 114 is deposited at a desired or final location relative to stored completed windrow(s) 168. In the combined Nafziger–Babler system, the completed windrow from Nafziger’s belly pass corresponds to the windrow track location of the belly pass, and the machine’s GPS-based position (and known geometry) gives the current position of the conveyor. Thus, in this context, controlling the current speed of the conveyor based on the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor includes controlling the current speed of the conveyor with the merger controller.
to achieve the desired speed of the conveyor.
See at least:
“the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds. In such examples, the conveyor interface 1104 directs a conveyor actuator 108 to operate a belt 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at the aforementioned first belt speed and/or within a first example range of belt speeds (e.g., about 15 feet per second or more)” ([0158]);
“adjusting output(s) of the conveyor interface 1104 such that the merger control system 1100 increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306” ([0203]).
Rationale: The merger controller 104 selects a target belt speed (such as the “first belt speed” or another commanded speed) and adjusts actuator outputs until the conveyor belts operate at that specific speed. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that this closed-loop action controls the current speed of the conveyor with the merger controller to achieve the desired speed of the conveyor, matching the claimed language.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to implement Babler’s conveyor-speed control loop in Nafziger’s belly-pass / merger-pass method so that controlling the current speed of the conveyor based on the windrow track location of the belly pass and the current position of the conveyor to achieve a desired throw distance of crop material discharged from the conveyor includes controlling the current speed of the conveyor with the merger controller to achieve the desired speed of the conveyor. Both references address windrowers with merger conveyors controlling deposition location; using the merger controller to drive the conveyor from a commanded speed until the actual speed matches that command is a routine, predictable control refinement that directly supports accurate throw-distance control, rendering Claim 18 obvious.
Regarding Claim 19,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the method of Claim 17, which is the basis for Claim 19.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly teach:
further comprising defining a baseline speed of the conveyor
for a baseline throw distance
and a baseline crop mass flow rate.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler teaches:
further comprising defining a baseline speed of the conveyor
See at least: “the conveyor interface 1104 directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds. In such examples, the conveyor interface 1104 directs a conveyor actuator 108 to operate a belt 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at the aforementioned first belt speed and/or within a first example range of belt speeds (e.g., about 15 feet per second or more)” ([0158]).
Rationale: The first belt speed used as the initial operating speed in method 1200/1206 corresponds, for a PHOSITA, to defining a baseline speed of the conveyor in the control algorithm.
for a baseline throw distance
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]); and “controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 … by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: At the initial first belt speed, the material 114 reaches a particular deposition location relative to the machine (a specific range). A PHOSITA would treat that initial range as a baseline throw distance associated with the baseline speed.
and a baseline crop mass flow rate.
See at least: “The sensor interface 1110 of FIG. 11 facilitates interactions and/or communications between at least some of the sensor(s) 150 and the merger control system 1100” and “at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 is indicative of one or more parameters associated with the material 114 such as, for example, a location (e.g., a global location), a shape, a size or volume, a density” ([0166]); and “The example method 1200 of FIG. 12 also includes detecting parameters associated with the material 114” ([0185]).
Rationale: At the same initial operating condition, the detected size or volume and density of material 114 on the moving conveyor allows a PHOSITA to compute a mass-per-time value, i.e., a baseline crop mass flow rate. Thus, Babler’s method inherently defines a baseline speed of the conveyor for a baseline throw distance and a baseline crop mass flow rate.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to extend the combined method of Claim 17 so that the merger controller first defines a baseline speed of the conveyor for a baseline throw distance and a baseline crop mass flow rate (using Babler’s first belt speed, its associated deposition range, and the mass-related sensor data), and then uses this baseline in subsequent adjustments. This is a routine initialization step in control systems for merger conveyors, rendering Claim 19 obvious.
Regarding Claim 20,
The combination of Nafziger and Babler establishes the method of Claim 19, which is the basis for Claim 20.
Disclosure by Nafziger
Nafziger does not explicitly teach:
further comprising: defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
when the desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance;
defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed
when the desired throw distance is less than the baseline throw distance;
defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is greater than the baseline crop mass flow rate;
and defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
Disclosure by Babler
Babler teaches:
further comprising: defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
See at least: “FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an example merger control system 1100” including “merger controller 104” and “conveyor interface 1104” ([0151], [0157]); “the conveyor interface 1104 … directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) 142, 306, 308, 800, 802, 804, 806 at one or more particular speeds and/or within one or more particular ranges of speeds” and “… at the aforementioned first belt speed and/or within a first example range of belt speeds” ([0158]); and “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306” ([0203]).
Rationale: Merger controller 104, via conveyor interface 1104, selects a first belt speed (baseline) and then increases that speed to alter deposition. When the belt speed is increased above that initial baseline, the controller is defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed.
when the desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance;
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]); and “controls the conveyor 134 via the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to form the fourth windrow 124 … by particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: At the baseline condition (first belt speed), material 114 reaches a baseline deposition location (baseline throw distance). When a desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance, a PHOSITA understands that achieving a farther “desired or final location” requires higher belt speed. Thus, using the same recorded windrow track and position information, the merger controller naturally defines the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed when the desired throw distance is greater than the baseline throw distance to reach a farther deposition location.
defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed
See at least: “the merger control system 1100 … increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114” ([0203]); and “the conveyor interface 1104 … directs the conveyor actuator(s) 108 to operate the conveyor belt(s) … at one or more particular speeds” ([0158]).
Rationale: The same control loop allows the merger controller 104 to decrease the belt speed from the initial first belt speed, thereby defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed when the algorithm selects a lower target speed.
when the desired throw distance is less than the baseline throw distance;
See at least: “increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114, which achieves a desired or final location of the material 114” ([0203]); and “particularly depositing the material 114 on the ground surface 116 relative to one or more completed windrow(s) 168” ([0052]).
Rationale: A reduced “desired or final location” closer to the machine corresponds to a desired throw distance less than the baseline throw distance. A PHOSITA knows that reducing projectile range requires reducing belt speed. Accordingly, in the combined system, the merger controller defines the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed when the desired throw distance is less than the baseline throw distance so that material lands closer than the baseline deposition location.
defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed
See at least: the same merger controller 104 and conveyor interface 1104 operations in which specific belt speeds are selected ([0151], [0157], [0158]); and the ability to increase speed of the first belt 306 ([0203]).
Rationale: Whenever the algorithm evaluates conditions and selects a belt speed higher than the previously established baseline, the merger controller is again defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed.
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is greater than the baseline crop mass flow rate;
See at least: “sensor(s) 150 are configured to generate sensor data 1126” and “at least a portion of the sensor data 1126 is indicative of one or more parameters associated with the material 114 such as, for example, a location (e.g., a global location), a shape, a size or volume, a density” ([0166]); and “The example method 1200 of FIG. 12 also includes detecting parameters associated with the material 114” ([0185]); together with the speed-adjustment logic “increases or decreases the speed of the first belt 306 to vary the deposition of the material 114” ([0203]).
Rationale: From size or volume and density of material 114 on the moving belt, a PHOSITA can compute a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor and compare it to the baseline crop mass flow rate established at the baseline condition. When the current mass flow rate exceeds the baseline, maintaining the same throw distance with more mass typically requires higher belt speed to project the larger stream to the same range. Thus, the control algorithm implemented by merger controller 104 would define the desired speed to be greater than the baseline speed when a current mass flow rate … is greater than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
and defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed
See at least: the merger controller 104 and conveyor interface 1104 selecting and adjusting belt speeds ([0151], [0157], [0158]); and the explicit ability to decrease the speed of the first belt 306 ([0203]).
Rationale: When the algorithm selects a belt speed below the baseline speed in response to sensed conditions, the controller is defining, with the merger controller, the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed.
when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
See at least: “sensor(s) 150 … generate sensor data 1126” indicative of size or volume and density ([0166]); “detecting parameters associated with the material 114” ([0185]); and the ability to decrease belt speed to adjust deposition location ([0203]).
Rationale: With current mass flow rate less than the baseline crop mass flow rate, a PHOSITA would recognize that less material may be thrown too far or dispersed if the belt continues at the higher baseline speed. A straightforward control response is to reduce belt speed so that the lighter stream still lands at the intended range. Thus, the controller defines the desired speed to be less than the baseline speed when a current mass flow rate of the crop material being moved by the conveyor is less than the baseline crop mass flow rate.
Motivation to Combine Nafziger and Babler
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Nafziger and Babler before them, to refine the combined method of Claim 19 so that the merger controller not only establishes a baseline speed, throw distance, and crop mass flow rate, but also defines the desired speed relative to that baseline as a function of both (1) desired throw distance vs. baseline throw distance and (2) current mass flow rate vs. baseline crop mass flow rate, increasing speed when either parameter is above baseline and decreasing speed when either parameter is below baseline. This is a routine, predictable control-law extension fully consistent with Babler’s disclosed speed-adjustment and sensor-based detection logic, rendering Claim 20 obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Dow (US20110094200A1)
Dow is cited to show conventional windrow merger structures. Dow describes a high-capacity side-delivery merger with multiple pickup and transfer units, float mechanisms, and rub rails arranged to form a smooth, uniform windrow, demonstrating that such multi-pickup merger configurations for consolidating crop material were well-known in the art.
Majkrzak (US20080237377A1)
Majkrzak is cited as evidence that automatic adjustment of feed or conveying speed based on operating conditions was known. Majkrzak teaches a hydraulic control system that varies feed roller speed in response to sensed load or hydraulic pressure in a wood chipper, illustrating load-responsive speed control of material-conveying elements.
Keller (US5987383A)
Keller is cited to show that GPS-based agricultural guidance and path-planning systems were conventional. Keller discloses generating form lines and guidance paths tailored to field contours and obstacles to ensure efficient coverage and controlled swath spacing, demonstrating that automated route generation for repeatedly traversing an agricultural field was known.
Gilmer (US20040149467A1)
Gilmer is cited as evidence regarding controlled treatment of elongated zones in land management. Gilmer teaches a silvicultural tillage system that defines access corridors and parallel infiltration zones created by a tillage gang, illustrating that patterned formation of repeated strips across a landscape for managing soil and water behavior was known.
McLearn (US20090139196A1)
McLean is cited to show that self-propelled windrowers with under-chassis merger attachments and mechanisms for selectively positioning the merger between working and non-working positions were known. McLean’s skew-axis lift linkage repositions the merger apparatus while preserving efficient crop discharge, illustrating conventional merger-attachment integration on modern windrow
Unruh (US20060237200A1)
Unruh is cited as evidence that GPS-controlled guidance systems for farm tractors and trailing implements were well known. Unruh discloses a hitch with hydraulic actuators, a GPS receiver on the toolbar, and control logic that laterally repositions the implement to follow a mapped path, illustrating precise implement-path control.
Myers (US5561250A)
Myers is cited as evidence that impact-based sensing and digital computation of grain mass-flow rate on harvesters were well known. Myers measures grain impact force from a conveyor, compensates for conveyor speed and moisture, and computes instantaneous mass-flow, yield, and harvested-area metrics, demonstrating mature sensor-driven flow-rate monitoring in combines.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUWABUSAYO ADEBANJO AWORUNSE whose telephone number is (571)272-4311. The examiner can normally be reached M - F (8:30AM - 5PM).
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at (571) 270-3969. 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.
/OLUWABUSAYO ADEBANJO AWORUNSE/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights