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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the amendments filed July 13, 2026. Claims 1, 10, 13, 16, and 18-20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the objections to claims 18 and 19. The claim objections of claims 18-19 are withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the rejection of claims 13-18 under 35 USC 101. The rejection under 35 USC 101 of claims 13-18 are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art rejections with respect to claims 1-20 have been fully considered are not persuasive.
Regarding the independent claims 1, 13, and 20, applicant argues that the office action does not show “a limit value” of the alleged grain characteristic in claim 1 (see pages 10-12 of remarks), where the argument is also made in the cases of independent claims 13 and 20 as well. The previous office action cites to [0037], [0056], and Fig. 3 of Meyers, which applicant provides at least the paragraphs in the remarks of pages 10-12. The figure discloses a flow chart of an example process that monitors APK parameters pertaining to the bulk grain processed by the harvester to perform other actions (Meyers, [0011]). The cited paragraphs are descriptive of the function of the figure shown, where [0037] describes manual prompting of the operator based on an average per kernel (APK) characteristics (“When such target setting adjustments are determined, the controller architecture 16 may prompt an operator of the combine harvester 10 to implement the target setting adjustments via generation of suitable graphics on the display device 24, via generation audible notifications (e.g., audible annunciation, chimes, or other audible cues), and/or via generation of any other operator-perceived cues (e.g., haptic notifications).”) and [0056] describes automatic adjustments based on APK characteristics (“As an example, relatively fine adjustments can be implemented to fan speeds to, for example, increase fan speeds in conjunction with increasing APK weight or size. Corresponding adjustments to the shoe, sieve, and/or chafer component positioning can also be automatically implemented in conjunction with fan speed adjustments in embodiments. When such automated adjustments are performed by the controller architecture 16, complementary graphics may be presented on the display screen 140 of the display device 24 and/or audible notifications may be generated to impart the operator with an awareness that such automated adjustments are being performed.”). In view of the exemplary case of at least the [0056], examiner maintains that Meyers does show a limit value.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 9, 13-14, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US20220132736A1 (Meyers) from the IDS.
Regarding claims 1, 13, and 20, Meyers discloses a mobile agricultural harvester, a computer implemented method, and an agricultural harvesting system, comprising:
a grain camera configured to detect grain and generate a camera output indicative of the detected grain;
Meyers discloses a grain camera configured to detect grain generate a camera output indicative of the detected grain (see at least [0036] and Fig. 2).
a display screen;
Meyers discloses a display screen ([0036], display screen 24).
one or more processors;
memory; and
Meyers discloses a controller architecture that processes the operator input from the operator interface ([0032]), where the controller architecture is connected to memory 82 as well (see Fig. 2 of Meyers).
computer executable instructions, stored in the memory, and executable by the one or more processors, the computer executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, configure the one or more processors to:
define a limit value of a grain characteristic;
[0056], “As an example, relatively fine adjustments can be implemented to fan speeds to, for example, increase fan speeds in conjunction with increasing APK weight or size.”
control one or more operating parameters, corresponding to the grain characteristic, of the mobile agricultural harvester based on the limit value of the grain characteristic;
[0056], “As an example, relatively fine adjustments can be implemented to fan speeds to, for example, increase fan speeds in conjunction with increasing APK weight or size. Corresponding adjustments to the shoe, sieve, and/or chafer component positioning can also be automatically implemented in conjunction with fan speed adjustments in embodiments. When such automated adjustments are performed by the controller architecture 16, complementary graphics may be presented on the display screen 140 of the display device 24 and/or audible notifications may be generated to impart the operator with an awareness that such automated adjustments are being performed.”
generate an interface comprising:
a grain camera display portion comprising a grain camera display element;
See at least Figs. 2, 4, and 5 of Meyers, where each exemplary GUI contains a grain camera display portion comprising a grain camera display element.
a grain characteristic value display portion comprising a grain characteristic value display element indicative of a value of grain characteristic of the detected grain; and
See Fig. 5 of Meyers, where the figure shows an example GUI screen ([0013]) comprising a grain characteristic value display element indicative of a value of grain characteristic of the detected grain (numerical read-outs of box 148).
a limit value adjuster display portion comprising an interactable limit value adjuster display element configured to receive operator or user interaction to adjust a limit value of the grain characteristic; and
[0037] of Meyers, “When such target setting adjustments are determined, the controller architecture 16 may prompt an operator of the combine harvester 10 to implement the target setting adjustments via generation of suitable graphics on the display device 24, via generation audible notifications (e.g., audible annunciation, chimes, or other audible cues), and/or via generation of any other operator-perceived cues (e.g., haptic notifications).”, where the adjustment suggestion may be based on the tracked average per kernel (APK) parameters (see at least [0056] and Fig. 3).
display the interface on the display screen.
See Fig. 5 of Meyers, where the interface is displayed on display screen 140 of display device 24.
Regarding claim 2, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the grain characteristic is grain cleanliness or grain brokenness.
[0036] of Meyers, “As can be seen, various operator-selectable options may also be produced on the GUI screen 74 to, for example, enable an operator to switch between presentation of the camera feeds obtained from the grain camera 56 and the tailings camera 72, to apply a visually-augmented grain quality analysis tool (applying color-coding to broken grain and MOG detected in the live camera image), and to perform other functions, such as providing visual advisory alerts regarding excessive lens debris.”
Regarding claim 6, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the computer executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to generate the interface further comprising:
a limit value display portion comprising a limit value display element indicative of the limit value of the grain characteristic.
[0056] of Meyers, “In embodiments, the controller architecture 16 may determine a target setting adjustment to the actuated harvesting component based on the tracked APK parameters, the topline harvesting metrics calculated utilizing the tracked APK parameters, or a combination thereof. Such information may be utilized to determine target adjustments to combine settings, which control the operation or positioning of the actuated harvesting components 76 described above in connection with FIG. 2. Further, the controller architecture 16 may generate imagery (e.g., a textual or symbol a visual notification) on the display device 24 prompt an operator to implement the determined target adjustments via appropriate visual cues.”
Regarding claim 7, with all of the limitations of claim 6, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the limit value display element is a textual representation of the limit value of the grain characteristic.
See the citation of claim 6.
Regarding claim 9, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the camera output is an image or a video feed of the grain camera and wherein the grain camera display element displays the image or the video feed of the grain camera based on the camera output.
See the citations to claim 1 regarding “a grain camera display portion …”.
Regarding claim 14, with all of the limitations of claim 13, the harvester further comprises:
wherein displaying the grain camera display element comprises displaying the grain camera display element to display an image or video feed of the grain camera based on the camera output and a color overlay over grain in the image or video feed to indicate the grain characteristic.
See citation of claim 2.
Regarding claim 18, with all of the limitations of claim 13, the harvester further comprises:
in a limit value display portion of the display screen, displaying a limit value display element indicative of a limit value of the grain characteristic.
See citation of claim 6.
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.
Claims 3-5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20220132736A1 (Meyers) from the IDS in view of US20190223375A1 (Missotten).
Regarding claim 3, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the interactable limit value adjuster display element comprises a scale and a slider configured to move along the scale in response to the operator or user interaction to adjust the limit value of the grain characteristic.
While Meyers discloses an interactable limit value adjuster display element to adjust the limit value of the grain characteristic (Meyers, [0036]), Meyers does not explicitly disclose that the interactable limit value adjuster display element comprises a scale and a slider configured to move along the scale in response to the operator or user interaction to adjust the limit value of the grain characteristic, from a similar field of endeavor of controller-based harvesters, Missotten discloses a controller configured to receive crop flow information and generate display information (Missotten, Abstract). Specifically, Misotten discloses an exemplary panel of the machine controls 104 (Missotten, [0117]) comprising an interactable limit value adjuster display element comprising a scale and a slider configured to move along the scale in response to the operator or user interaction to adjust the limit value of the grain characteristic (see Fig. 5, where “TRAVEL SPEED”, “THRESHING”, “CLEANING” are adjacent to scales with user-adjustable sliders to operate along the scales.
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try, prior to the applicant’s effective filing date, to combine the system of Missotten to the system of Meyers as the inventions are already compatible as both comprise user-based GUI control and sliders are another form of user input that may provide a more intuitive experience for the operator.
Regarding claim 4, with all of the limitations of claim 3, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the slider is configured to receive the operator or user interaction.
See the rationale of claim 3.
Regarding claim 5, with all of the limitations of claim 3, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the interactable limit value adjuster display element further comprises
a first interactable adjuster element configured to receive the operator or user interaction to move the slider in a first direction along the scale and
a second interactable adjuster element configured to receive the operator or user interaction to move the slider in a second direction along the scale.
See the rationale of claim 3, where Missotten discloses two interactable adjust elements configured to receive operator or user interaction, where both the interactable adjuster elements comprise sliders movable in two directions (up and down).
Regarding claim 15, with all of the limitations of claim 13, the harvester further comprises:
wherein displaying the interactable limit value adjuster display element comprises displaying the interactable limit value adjuster display element including a scale and a slider, the slider moveable, based on the operator or user interaction with the interactable limit value adjuster display element, along the scale in a first direction to increase the limit value of the grain characteristic and in a second direction to decrease the limit value of the grain characteristic.
See the rationale of claim 5, where one of ordinary skill in the art would find it further obvious to try a first direction that increases the limit value and a second direction that decreases the limit value as the sliders adjust the value as there a finite number of identified solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, where the slider can only move in two directions (up or down) and the value can only increase or decrease. See MPEP 2143(I)(E).
Claims 10-11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20220132736A1 (Meyers) from the IDS.
Regarding claim 10, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the grain camera display element is an interactable grain camera display element configured to receive an input from a user or an operator and
See Fig. 2 of Meyers, where the grain camera display element is an interactable grain camera display element configured to receive an input from a user or an operator ([0036]).
wherein the computer executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
generate, based on input from the user or the operator, an additional interface comprising:
an additional grain camera display portion comprising an additional grain camera display element that displays an image or a video feed of the grain camera based on the camera output; and
While Meyers does not explicitly disclose generating, based on input from the user or the operator, an additional interface comprising an additional grain camera display portion comprising an additional grain camera display element that displays an image or a video feed of the grain camera based on the camera output, Meyers discloses in Fig. 2 a “Source” section regarding camera sources to display in the GUI screen. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that an additional grain camera display portion comprising an additional grain camera display element that displays an image or a video feed of the grain camera based on the camera output would be generated in changing the source as Meyers discloses multiple cameras at differing locations ([0031]).
an additional limit value adjuster display portion comprising an additional interactable limit value adjuster display element that is interactable to adjust the limit value of the grain characteristic; and
[0073] of Meyers, “The controller architecture is configured to analyze the bulk grain sample images, as received from the grain camera, to determine an average per kernel (APK) parameter; and determine a target setting adjustment to an actuated harvesting component of the combine harvester based, at least in part, on the APK parameter. Additionally, the controller architecture performs at least one of the following actions: (i) generating a notification, such as a visual and/or audible notification, prompting an operator to implement the target setting adjustment; and (ii) controlling the actuated harvesting component to automatically implement the target setting adjustment.”
display the additional interface on the display screen.
In view of the citations and rationales above within claim 10, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the additional interface is displayed on the display screen as the additional grain camera display portion and the additional limit value adjuster display portion disclosed by Meyers both generate a visual change to the GUI.
Regarding claim 11, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the harvester further comprises:
a controllable subsystem and wherein the computer executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
identify an adjusted limit value of the grain characteristic based on the operator or user interaction;
[0037] of Meyers, “Additionally or alternatively, embodiments of the kernel-level grain monitoring system 12 may determine target setting adjustments to actuated harvesting components of the combine harvester 10 utilizing (that is, based at least in part on) the instantaneous values or trends of APK parameters; the instantaneous values or trends of topline harvesting metrics; or any blended combination thereof. When such target setting adjustments are determined, the controller architecture 16 may prompt an operator of the combine harvester 10 to implement the target setting adjustments via generation of suitable graphics on the display device 24, via generation audible notifications (e.g., audible annunciation, chimes, or other audible cues), and/or via generation of any other operator-perceived cues (e.g., haptic notifications).”, where “the target setting adjustments” are the identified adjusted limit value of the grain characteristic.
identify a current value of the grain characteristic based on the camera output; and
See Fig. 4 of Meyers, where box 126 shows identifying a current value of the grain characteristic based on the camera output in box 120.
generate a control signal to control the controllable subsystem based on the adjusted limit value of the grain characteristic and based on the current value of the grain characteristic.
While Meyers discloses generating a control signal to control the controllable subsystem based on the current value of the grain characteristic ([0056], “increase fan speeds in conjunction with increasing APK weight or size.”), Meyers does not explicitly generate a control signal to control the controllable subsystem based on the adjusted limit value of the grain characteristic and based on the current value of the grain characteristic. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to generate a control signal based on the adjusted limit value (“target settings adjustments”) and current value of the grain characteristic asthe adjusted limit value calculated is the value selected by the operator to modify the current limit value to be the adjusted limit value..
Regarding claim 19, with all of the limitations of claim 13, the harvester further comprises:
identifying an adjusted limit value of the grain characteristic based on the operator or user interaction;
See the rationale of claim 11.
identifying a current value of the grain characteristic; and
See the rationale of claim 11.
generating the control signal to control the controllable subsystem of the mobile agricultural harvester based on the adjusted limit value of the grain characteristic and based on the current value of the grain characteristic.
See the rationale of claim 11.
Claims 8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20220132736A1 (Meyers) from the IDS in view of US20190223375A1 (Missotten) and in further view of US20220026230A1 (Sidon).
Regarding claim 8, with all of the limitations of claim 6, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the interactable limit value adjuster display element comprises
a scale and a slider configured to move along the scale in response to the operator or user interaction to adjust the limit value of the grain characteristic and
wherein the limit value display element is a mark incorporated into the scale.
While Meyers discloses an interactable limit value adjuster display element, Meyers does not disclose a scale and a slider configured to move along the scale in response to the operator or user interaction to adjust the limit value of the grain characteristic and wherein the limit value display element is a mark incorporated into the scale. In light of the rationale of claim 3, Missotten discloses a scale and a slider for adjusting the limit value of the grain characteristic, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the limit value display element is a mark incorporated into the scale. From a similar field of endeavor, Sidon discloses a user interface for an agricultural machine (Sidon, Fig. 3, box 350) comprising a slider element (Sidon, Fig. 3, slider 351) along a scale (Sidon, [0052], “bins”) with marks incorporated into the scale (Sidon, [0052], “As indicated by block 353, text input boxes can be generated. These text input boxes allow user to enter raw values or metric values that correspond to the value ranges of the bins.”)
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious, prior to the applicant’s effective filing date to further integrate the markings disclosed by Sidon to the system of Meyers in view of Missotten as the marks are configurable to set boundaries of ranges to be dependent on the variable and the marks provide more accurate approximation of the slider’s current position to better assist operators to gauge the desired slider value.
Regarding claim 16, with all of the limitations of claim 15, the harvester further comprises:
wherein displaying the grain characteristic value display element comprises displaying the grain characteristic value display element as a grain characteristic value display element mark incorporated into the scale.
See the rationale of claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, with all of the limitations of claim 16, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the scale includes a plurality of marks, a first subset of the plurality of marks displayed towards a first side of the grain characteristic value display element mark in the first direction and a second subset of the plurality of marks displayed towards a second side of the grain characteristic value display element mark in the second direction.
In light of the rationale of claim 8, see Fig. 4 of Sidon. The figure shows a plurality of marks (Sidon, Fig. 4, raw value inputs 444) with a first subset of the plurality of marks displayed towards a first side of the grain characteristic value display element mark in the first direction (Sidon, Fig. 4, raw value inputs 444 of “93.9”, “84.76”, and “75.62”) and a second subset of the plurality of marks displayed towards a second side of the grain characteristic value display element mark in the second direction (Sidon, Fig. 4, raw value inputs 444 of “66.47”, “57.33”, and “48.19”).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20220132736A1 (Meyers) from the IDS in view of US20100217474A1 (Baumgarten) from the IDS.
Regarding claim 12, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the harvester further comprises:
wherein the grain characteristic value display element comprises a first grain characteristic value display element indicative of a value of grain brokenness of the detected grain, wherein the interactable limit value adjuster display element is a first interactable limit value adjuster display element configured to receive operator or user interaction to adjust a limit value of grain brokenness, wherein the interface further comprises:
a second grain characteristic value display element indicative of a value of grain cleanliness of the detected grain; and
While Meyers does disclose a second grain characteristic value display element (see Fig. 2 of Meyers, where “Source” in the GUI menu comprises a second grain characteristic value display element), Meyers does not disclose a second grain characteristic value display element indicative of a value of grain cleanliness of the detected grain. From a similar field of endeavor of agricultural harvesters, Baumgarten discloses a system of agricultural working machines. Specifically, Baumgarten discloses a grain characteristic value display element indicative of a value of grain cleanliness of the detected grain (Baumgarten, [0038]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious, prior to the applicant’s effective filing date, combine the system of Baumgarten to the system of Meyers as the addition of Baumgarten would improve the GUI of Meyers by allowing an operator of the system of Meyers to use grain cleanliness as a variable to modify operations of the agricultural harvester, improving grain flow rate.
a second interactable limit value adjuster display element configured to receive operator or user interaction to adjust a limit value of grain cleanliness.
In light of the rationale of claim 12 regarding “a second grain characteristic value display element …” above, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to include a second interactable limit value adjuster to adjust the limit value of grain cleanliness as the system of Meyers already supports adjusting limit values in response to sensor feedback to the controller architecture 16.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAEWOOK JUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-5470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM..
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, Wade Miles can be reached on (571) 270-7777. 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.
/J.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/WADE MILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights