Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/479,447

HEADER AUTOMATION SYSTEM UTILIZING FRONT FEEDER DRUM POSITION VARIATION OVER TIME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 02, 2023
Examiner
SHAAWAT, MUSSA A
Art Unit
3669
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Cnh Industrial America LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
665 granted / 876 resolved
+23.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
905
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
§103
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
§102
37.5%
-2.5% vs TC avg
§112
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 876 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Figgins et al., US Pg. Pub. No. (2017/0064904) referred to hereinafter as Figgins in view of Vandeven et al., US Pg. Pub. No. (2021/0100155) referred to hereinafter. As per claim 1, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester, comprising: a header for gathering a crop and feeding the crop into a feeder housing; the feeder housing (see at least abstract, summary, Para 33, 35, 37), comprising: a system for automatically adjusting one or more parameters of the header, wherein the system comprises: one or more sensors configured to detect a position of the conveyor idler over time (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33, 35, 37); and a controller configured to receive a signal indicative of the position of the conveyor idler and to provide one or more control signals to adjust the one or more parameters of the header based on variation of the position of the conveyor idler over time (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). Figgins doesn’t expressly teach a conveyer, comprising a conveyor idler, however Vandeven teaches a conveyer, comprising a conveyor idler (see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of Vandeven into the disclosure of Figgins, in order to ensure smooth operation and help maintain the longevity of the equipment. As per claim 2, although Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 1, Figgins does not expressly teach wherein the variation of the position of the conveyor idler over time relates to movement of the conveyor idler in a direction perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the conveyer. However Vandeven teaches wherein the variation of the position of the conveyor idler over time relates to movement of the conveyor idler in a direction perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the conveyer (see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of Vandeven into the disclosure of Figgins, in order to ensure smooth operation and help maintain the longevity of the equipment. As per claim 3, Figgins does not expressly teach limitation of claim 3, however Vandeven teaches wherein the variation of the position of the conveyor idler over time relates to movement of the conveyor idler in a direction parallel to a longitudinal axis of the conveyer(see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of Vandeven into the disclosure of Figgins, in order to ensure smooth operation and help maintain the longevity of the equipment. As per claim 4, Figgins doesn’t expressly teach the limitations of claim 4 however Vandeven teaches wherein the conveyor idler comprises a first longitudinal end adjacent a first side of the feeder housing and a second longitudinal end adjacent a second side of the feeder housing and opposite the first longitudinal end (see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1), wherein the one or more sensors are configured to detect both a first position of the conveyor idler over time at the first longitudinal end and a second position of the conveyor idler over time at the second longitudinal end(see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1), wherein the controller is configured to receive both a first signal indicative of the first position and a second signal indicative of second position, to derive differences across a width of the conveyor extending from the first side to the second side in feeding the crop into the feeder housing based on first signal and the second signal, and to provide the one or more control signals to adjust the one or more parameters of the header across a width of the header based on the variation of both the first position and the second position of the conveyor idler over time (see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of Vandeven into the disclosure of Figgins, in order to ensure smooth operation and help maintain the longevity of the equipment. As per claim 5, Figgins doesn’t expressly teach the limitations of claim 5, however Vandeven teaches a wherein the conveyor comprises a plurality of chains disposed about the conveyor idler and a plurality of slats extending across at least two chains of the plurality of chains (see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1), wherein the plurality of slats comprises a first set of slats disposed on the plurality of chains adjacent the first side, a second set of slats disposed on the plurality of chains adjacent the second side (see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1), and a third set of slats disposed on the plurality of chains between the first set of slats and the second set of slats, wherein a first spacing of the first set of slats along the longitudinal axis differs from a second spacing of the second set of slats along the longitudinal axis and/or a third spacing of the third set of slats along the longitudinal axis to enable the differences across the width of the conveyor in feeding the crop into the feeder housing to be detected (see at least Para 36, 38, 40, fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of Vandeven into the disclosure of Figgins, in order to ensure smooth operation and help maintain the longevity of the equipment. As per claim 6, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 3, wherein the controller is configured to bandpass filter the signal at a frequency that the plurality of slats pass a detection location of the one or more sensors to generate a filtered signal (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). As per claim 7, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to provide the one or more control signals to adjust the one or more parameters of the header based on variation over time of the filtered signal (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). As per claim 8, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 3, wherein the controller is configured to receive an additional signal indicative of net engine load, to calculate a recursive correlation between variation of the net engine load over time and the variation of the position of the conveyor idler over time, and to adjust both the one or more parameters of the header and a ground speed of the agricultural harvester based on the recursive correlation (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). As per claim 9, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 3, wherein the controller is configured to receive one or more additional signals indicative of a distribution of the crop across a width of the conveyor, and to adjust the one or more parameters of the header based on both the variation of the position of the conveyor idler over time and the one or more additional signals (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). As per claim 10, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to receive additional data and to provide the one or more control signals to adjust the one or more parameters of the header based on both the variation of the position of the conveyor idler over time and the additional data, wherein the additional data comprises crop height, crop density, and/or humidity prior to cutting or while cutting the crop (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). As per claim 11, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to adjust the one or more parameters of the header until the variation is minimized (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). As per claim 12, Figgins teaches an agricultural harvester of claim 1, wherein the one or more parameters comprises at least one of knife position, reel position, auger speed, and belt speeds of a draper (see at least abstract, summary Para 29-30, 33-35, 37). As per claims 13-20, the limitations of claims 13-20 are similar to the limitations of claims 1-12, therefore they are rejected based on the same rationale. Conclusion Please refer to from 892 for cited references. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSSA A SHAAWAT whose telephone number is (313)446-6592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, Erin Piateski can be reached at 571-270-7429. 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. /MUSSA A SHAAWAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 02, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 06, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595070
METHOD OF OPERATING A ROTORCRAFT IN A SINGLE ENGINE OPERATION MODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595049
METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A ROTORCRAFT, ASSOCIATED ROTORCRAFT AND COMPUTER PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583605
FAST THRUST RESPONSE USING OPTIMAL POWER SPLITTING IN HYBRID ELECTRIC AIRCRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583606
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AIRCRAFT ENERGY OPTIMIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576715
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+6.3%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 876 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month