DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. This Office Action is in response to the Applicant' s filing on 01/30/2026. Claims 1-20 were previously pending, of which claims 1, 5-7, 12-14 and 20 have been amended, no claims have been cancelled, and no new claims have been newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are currently pending and are being examined below.
Response to Arguments
3. With respect to the Applicant’s remarks, see pages 7 – 10, filed on 01/30/2026; Applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
4. With respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), the amendments now render this rejection moot. The 35 U.S.C. 112(f) rejection has been withdrawn.
5. With respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103, the arguments have been fully considered. The argument that claim 1 is not taught by Dix is not persuasive. Dix is not what is being used to teach “detecting first ends of rows located at the first edge of the agricultural field”. Vesperman is what is being used to cover that claim limitation. However, due to the nature of the applicant’s amendments, the scope of the applicant’s invention has changed and thus requires new analysis and new application of prior art. Further search found that Dix and Vesperman do disclose these newly added amendments which can be found in the office action below.
The argument that Dix does not teach or suggest anything in regard to detecting ends of rows on opposite edges of an agricultural field and then generating intermediate segments connecting respective first path segments and second path segments at the opposite edges of the agricultural field is not persuasive. Dix teaches generating swath paths that extend across an agricultural field between field boundaries and constructing those swath paths from connected segments derived from position data points. Dix discloses that a swath path (102) is defined by a plurality of data points (104) extending from a beginning point (103) towards and end point (105) across the field and that additional swath paths are generated based on the baseline swath to cover the entire field area [0042]. The ends of swath paths are extended so that the swaths reach the field perimeter (210), thereby accounting for irregular boundaries and ensuring that a vehicle traversing the swath reaches the field perimeter (210). Due to swath paths extending between opposite portions of the field perimeter (210) and are defined by a sequence of connected segments between data points (104), it would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill that Dix generates intermediate path segments that connect portions of the swath path near one field edge with portions near another field edge. Thus, the connected swath segments forming the swath path correspond to the claimed intermediate path segments that connect respective first path segments associated with one side of the field with second path segments associated with the opposite side of the field. Figure 3 and 4 show this.
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.
7. Claim(s) 1, 3, 5 – 12, 19 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No 20080103690A1 (hereinafter, “Dix”), and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220350991A1 (hereinafter, “Vesperman”).
8. Regarding claim 1, Dix teaches a method for path planning for an agricultural field comprising rows (see [0036] Fig. 2), the method comprising the steps: Creating swaths on field which can also be interpreted as rows.
moving a sensor unit having a limited sensing range in the agricultural field for detecting rows along a first edge of the agricultural field (see [0033] - [0034]); SGA10 memorizes and detects swaths.
9. Dix further does not explicitly teach detecting first ends of rows located at the first edge of the agricultural field;
However, Vesperman in the same field of endeavor, teaches detecting first ends of rows located at the first edge of the agricultural field (see [0044], [0065], Fig 4); Vesperman teaches a system that can detect end of rows as the vehicle (110) navigates the field [0044]. The operator (201) may specify a route for the vehicle (110) to follow and this operator created route may involve the vehicle (110) traveling the perimeter of the field to detect these end of rows [0065].
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix with the teachings of Vesperman, to have a system that can detect pre-made rows along the edges of a field and connect those rows together via segments to create a field of rows using that limited data for efficiency.
10. Dix teaches determining first path segments, each first path segment matching with a respective first end of the detected first ends of rows (see [0037], [0041] Fig. 2); Swath width 110 constitutes as a path segment. Swath width can be used to calculate first path segments and second path segments by adding multiple swath widths together in accordance to how many rows of swaths were detected at the location of the first edge and second edge of the agricultural field.
moving the sensor along a second edge of the agricultural field (see Fig. 4, 9 – 10) A second edge of an agricultural field is shown in figures 4 and 9 – 10 in which the swath machine will travel along with the sensor (SGA 10) to create these swaths (102).
11. Dix further does not explicitly teach detecting second ends of rows located at the second edge of the agricultural field, opposite the first edge of the agricultural field;
However, Vesperman in the same field of endeavor, teaches detecting second ends of rows located at the second edge of the agricultural field, opposite the first edge of the agricultural field (see [0044], [0065], Fig 4); Vesperman teaches a system that can detect end of rows as the vehicle (110) navigates the field [0044]. The operator (201) may specify a route for the vehicle (110) to follow and this operator created route may involve the vehicle (110) traveling the perimeter of the field such as the opposite side of the field to detect these end of rows [0065].
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix with the teachings of Vesperman, to have a system that can detect pre-made rows along the edges of a field and connect those rows together via segments to create a field of rows using that limited data for efficiency.
12. Dix teaches determining second path segments, each second path segment matching with a respective second end of the detected second ends of rows; and (see [0037], [0041] Fig. 2); Swath width 110 constitutes as a path segment. Swath width can be used to calculate first path segments and second path segments by adding multiple swath widths together in accordance to how many rows of swaths were detected at the location of the first edge and second edge of the agricultural field.
13. Dix teaches generating at least two intermediate path segments, each intermediate path segment connecting a respective first path segment of the determined first path segments with a second path segment of the determined of the second path segments (see [0037] – [0038], [0050] – [0052] Fig. 2 & 5). Dix teaches generating path segments that connect portions of a swath path to form a complete swath. Dix discloses that a swath (108) is defined by a plurality of position data points (104) extending from a beginning position (103) to an end position (105) and that swath segments (106) connect adjacent pairs of the position data points (104) along the swath path (102). Each swath segment (106) therefore functions as an intermediate path segment that connects two portions of the overall swath path defined by the position data points (104) because the swath path is constructed from multiple swath segments that sequentially connect pairs of position data points located along different portions of the swath path. Dix effectively teaches generating multiple intermediate path segments that connect one portion of the path (corresponding to a first path segment determined from a first set of position data points) with another portion of the path (corresponding to a second path segment determined from another set of position data points). The connected swath segments collectively reconstruct the full swath path across the field. Therefore, Dix generates at least two intermediate path segments that connect respective first and second path segments.
14. Regarding claim 3, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 2, wherein the two adjacent first path segments are of the same order as the two adjacent second path segments (see Fig. 2). Swath widths (110) are created based off of swath segments (106) which create rows of swaths (108). Swath segments (106) are aligned with the same order as the second path segments because the rows are not misaligned therefore, they are of matching order.
15. Regarding claim 5, Dix does not explicitly teach the method for path planning of claim 1, wherein the first and second ends of the rows are detected by the sensor unit without traversing any row by moving the sensor unit around the rows of the agricultural field.
However, Vesperman in the same field of endeavor, teaches the method for path planning of claim 1, wherein the first and second ends of the rows are detected by the sensor unit without traversing any row by moving the sensor unit around the rows of the agricultural field (see [0020], [0065]). Vehicle 110 has a row vision system (120) for detecting rows. A route can be specified for the vehicle to traverse so a route that only traverse the perimeter of the field can be specified for the vehicle to traverse in order to detect first and second ends of rows using the row vision system (120).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix with the teachings of Vesperman, to detect rows without interrupting or ruining any of the rows that are present in the field by not traversing over them (see [0020], [0065]).
16. Regarding claim 6, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 1, wherein a first or a second path segment is determined for an end of a row if the first or the second end is oriented different to a movement direction of the sensor unit at a moment the sensor unit detected the corresponding end of the row (see [0034], [0037] – [0038] Fig. 2). Swath segments are connected from data point to data point which infers that a first or second path segment are already determined if the first or second end is oriented differently from the movement direction of the sensor (SGA10). When the data points are connected, it is inherent that a first or second path segment is determined in order to connect the data points together to create a swath segment (106).
17. Regarding claim 7, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 1, further comprising:
determining at least two intermediate path segments, each intermediate path
segment connecting a first path segment with a second path segment of the same order as the first path segment (see [0037] – [0038], Fig. 2). A first path segment could be considered data points 104. The first path segment would be the first data point that is beginning the connection to the second data point. This constitutes as two intermediate path segments connecting to each other from the same order since they aren’t misaligned.
18. Regarding claim 8, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 7, further comprising:
determining a reference path segment; wherein
an intermediate path segment connecting a first path segment with a second path
segment of the same order as the first path segment is parallel to the reference path segment (see [0034] “….memorize a baseline swath, efficiently store the position data for points along the baseline swath path, generate additional, generally parallel swath paths…”). Uses a baseline swath which can also be interpreted as a reference swath path to create parallel swath paths of the same order due to them being connected in a straight line via swath segments (106).
19. Regarding claim 9, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 8, wherein the reference path segment is an intermediate path segment connecting a first and a second path segment of a lower order than the order of the first and second path segment connected with the intermediate path segment being parallel to the reference path segment (see [0042] Fig 3 & 4). A baseline swath path (102) is created which constitutes as a reference path segment is used in order to create other swath paths that are in parallel to the baseline swath path (102). The baseline swath path (102) is of a lower order because it is the first swath path that is created so therefore it is of the 1st order before the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th orders are created based off of the baseline swath path (102).
20. Regarding claim 10, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 8, wherein the reference path segment is determined by an extrapolation of a first path segment and an extrapolation of a second path segment of the same order as the first path segment, the extrapolation of the second path segment intersecting the extrapolation of the first path segment (see [0042] Fig 3 & 4). A baseline swath path (102) is created which constitutes as a reference path segment is used in order to create other swath paths that are in parallel to the baseline swath path (102). Inherently, those two data points which are connected by each other by the SGA 10 have to be extrapolated in order connect the two data point together. They are also of the same order since they are aligned together.
21. Regarding claim 11, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 8, wherein the reference path segment is oriented at least partly along a third edge of the agricultural field (see [0042] Fig. 3). Dix shows the baseline swath (102) which can be considered a reference path segment, is oriented along an edge which we can consider it to be the third edge of the field. Dix does also teach determining a travel path representing the movement of a sensor unit (GPS) wherein the determination of the reference path unit is based on the travel path and uses a GPS to record a swath (see [0045]).
22. Regarding claim 12, Dix does not explicitly teach the method for path planning of claim 8, further comprising:
determining a travel path representing the movement of the sensor unit,
wherein the determination of the reference path segment is based on the travel path.
However, Blume in the same field of endeavor, teaches the method for path planning of claim 8, comprising the step of:
Determining a travel path representing the movement of the sensor unit;
wherein the determination of the reference path segment is based on the travel path (see [0054] Fig, 1). Blume teaches using at least one of a camera sensor, LIDAR sensor, radar sensor, or an ultrasonic sensor which can be mounted on the vehicle as it travels as the environment detection system (4). Incorporating either a camera sensor, LIDAR sensor, radar sensor, or an ultrasonic sensor onto the vehicle of Dix would give the vehicle better environmental awareness. A GPS coordinate system doesn’t actively scan your surroundings for surrounding objects such as swaths and other important agricultural field details and could potentially be off by a few centimeters. Using a camera sensor, LIDAR sensor, radar sensor, or an ultrasonic sensor would be more accurate in order to scan through dust, foliage, or even darkness providing a much more robust sensing system which would be more reliable and precise in comparison to a GPS coordinate system.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix with the teachings of Blume, to have a vehicle with a sensor unit that can detect rows on a field to follow a path that is set by a user ahead of time instead of manually having to control the vehicle in real time (see [0065] Fig. 4).
23. Regarding claim 19, Dix teaches a control unit configured to perform the method of claim 1 (see [0034]). SGA (swath generation apparatus) (10) carries out calculations for connecting swath paths.
24. Regarding claim 20, Dix teaches a vehicle comprising a control unit… (see [0034]) SGA (swath generation apparatus) (10) carries out calculations for connecting swath paths.
Dix does not appear to explicitly recite …and a sensor unit, the vehicle being configured to perform the method of claim 1.
However, Vesperman explicitly recites …and a sensor unit, the vehicle being configured to perform the method of claim 1 (see Fig. 2). A row vision system for detecting edges of rows (120).
Dix and Vesperman are analogous art because Dix has an SGA that can generate swath segments amongst datapoints while Vesperman has the row vision system which senses for rows as it navigates a field.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Dix and Vesperman, to modify the teachings of the combination of Dix to include the teachings of Vesperman to have a vehicle with a system that can navigate through a field and detect rows along all the edges of the field and form a mapped out field of rows using those detected rows without manually having to do it.
25. Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No 20080103690A1 (hereinafter, “Dix”). and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220350991A1 (hereinafter, “Vesperman”), and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 11112262B2 (hereinafter, “Anderson”), and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220382290A1 (hereinafter, “Blume”).
26. Regarding claim 2, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 1, further comprising:
determining distances between the first path segments (see [0045] - [0046]); Swath width (110) constitutes as path segments if added together accordingly. A distance can be determined by adding swath width’s together for the first ends of rows to calculate the distance between the first path segments. Same method can be applied for second path segments.
determining distances between the second path segments (see [0045] - [0046]); and Swath width (110) constitutes as path segments if added together accordingly. A distance can be determined by adding swath width’s together for the first ends of rows to calculate the distance between the first path segments. Same method can be applied for second path segments.
Dix does not appear to explicitly recite …determining an additional second path segment between two adjacent second
path segments if a distance between the two adjacent second path segments is greater than one and a half times of a distance between two adjacent first path segments.
However, Blume explicitly recites …determining an additional second path segment between two adjacent second
path segments… (see Fig. 2 - 6b). Blume teaches a method that can detect irregularities and adjust or fix those irregularities. Blume is capable of producing an additional second path segment based off of the calculations and processes it can currently do. It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill to implement this feature when an additional second path segment between two adjacent second path segments is needed.
However, the combination of Dix and Blume does not appear to explicitly disclose if a distance between the two adjacent second path segments is greater than one and a half times of a distance between two adjacent first path segments.
However, Anderson explicitly recites if a distance between the two adjacent second path segments is greater than one and a half times of a distance between two adjacent first path segments (see [Col. 12] Row 21 – 24). A target lateral offset which can be a swath width that is measured in percentage. This in conjunction with Dix’s method of measuring swath widths and using that to determine distances by combining a specified amount of swath widths together to determine the distances between the first and second path segments can be optimized using trial and error to come to a conclusion of if the distance between two adjacent second path segments are greater than one and a half times of a distance between two adjacent first path segments.
The combination of Dix, Blume, and Anderson are analogous art because Dix teaches a way of measuring distances of first and second path segments based off of swath widths. Blume has the capabilities of creating an additional second path segment between two adjacent second path segments. Anderson has a way of measuring the distance between the two segments and coming to a conclusion if it is one and a half times greater or not.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Dix, Blume, and Anderson, to modify the teachings of the combination of Dix and Blume to include the teachings of Anderson to have the capabilities of determining distances between path segments as well as creating an additional second path segment to have a field that is organized with each row connecting to another row evenly.
27. Claim(s) 4, 13 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No 20080103690A1 (hereinafter, “Dix”). and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220350991A1 (hereinafter, “Vesperman”), and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220382290A1 (hereinafter, “Blume”).
28. Regarding claim 4, Dix teaches the method for path planning of claim 2, further comprising:
determining a number of the first path segments (see [0038], [0055]); n is the total path of generated swath paths which can be used to calculate a number of first path segments by calculating the swath width (110) in between each swath path and then making a determination of how many first path segments or second path segments there are based off of the calculation of swath widths.
determining a number of the second path segments (see [0038], [0055]); and n is the total path of generated swath paths which can be used to calculate a number of first path segments by calculating the swath width (110) in between each swath path and then making a determination of how many first path segments or second path segments there are based off of the calculation of swath widths.
Dix does not appear to explicitly recite determining the additional second path segment between two adjacent second
path segments if the number of second path segments is smaller than the number of first path segments.
However, Blume explicitly recites determining the additional second path segment between two adjacent second
path segments if the number of second path segments is smaller than the number of first path segments (see [0082] – [0085]). If Dix’s teachings end up having less second path segments compared to the first path segments, then Blume’s control unit (33) can make that determination based off of how it approaches detecting irregularities in the agricultural field that an additional second path segment is needed. Once that detection has occurred, Blume’s control unit (33) can then create an additional second path segment. If Blume can connect swaths together, bridge gaps inbetween swaths, connect corner swaths, and deal with flattened swaths, then Blume can easily create an additional second path segment based off of its capabilities.
Dix and Blume are analogous art because Dix can combine swath datapoints together in order to create swath segments. Dix doesn’t create additional segments if the number of second path segments is smaller. Blume can add in a vehicle controller which does that type of processing with its calculations of detecting irregularities.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of ref Dix and Blume, to modify the teachings of the combination of Dix to include the teachings of Blume because it’ll prevent unevenness of rows by coming up with an additional second path segment when it comes to creating rows on a field if we have less second path segments than first path segments.
29. Regarding claim 13, Vesperman teaches the method for path planning of claim 7, further comprising:
moving the sensor unit along a first intermediate path segment out of the determined intermediate path segments (see [0065]); Vesperman teaches having the guidance system (210) be able to follow a specified route by a user. Guidance System can be told to move along the area that would be considered a first intermediate path segment.
detecting a row located next to the first intermediate path segment (see [0074] Fig. 4); A row vision system as it traverses down a guidance line (411) can detect a row edge located near it.
Vesperman does not appear to explicitly recite checking whether a second intermediate path segment out of the determined intermediate path segments
matches with the detected row, wherein
the second intermediate path segment is connected with a first or second path
segment matching with a first or second end of the detected row, and…
However, Dix explicitly recites checking whether a second intermediate path segment out of the determined intermediate path segments
matches with the detected row; wherein
the second intermediate path segment is connected with a first or second path
segment matching with a first or second end of the detected row; and… (see [0037] – [0038], [0050]) Swath segments (106) are connected to data points which have to inherently be checked to see if they line up correctly with each other. Vesperman’s teachings can be implemented here as the row vision system is moving along a guidance. As the vehicle is moving along a guidance line, it can detect row edges nearby if they are within scope of the row vision system. Once a row edge has been detected as the vehicle is moving along, Dix’s teachings can be incorporated to where a second intermediate path segment can be connected with either a first or second end of a detected row.
The combination of Vesperman and Dix does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises further the step in case of a mismatch between the
second intermediate path segment and the detected row; and
reconnecting the second intermediate path segment with a first and a second path segment of different order.
However, Blume explicitly recites wherein the method comprises further the step in case of a mismatch between the
second intermediate path segment and the detected row; and
reconnecting the second intermediate path segment with a first and a second path segment of different order (see [0083] Fig. 2, 6a – 6b). Blume teaches a method that can detect irregularities and adjust or fix those irregularities. The control unit (33) can calculate additional lines from the main swath to other swaths that are next to the main swath. It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill to implement this feature when a mismatch of swaths has occurred to create additional lines for the swath to reconnect to a nearby swath of a different order. A different order meaning that the reconnected second intermediate path segment will connect to a first path segment and a nearby second path segment that was detected at a separate instance whether it was detected before or after the initial second path segment that the second intermediate path segment was disconnected from.
Vesperman, Dix, and Blume are analogous art because Vesperman implements a vehicle along with a navigation module which can specify a route for the vehicle to traverse and a row detection system to detect rows. Dix can combine swaths together via by segments and Blume can detect irregularities amongst swaths and fix accordingly.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Vesperman, Dix, and Blume to modify the teachings of the combination of Vesperman to include the teachings of Dix and Blume because that’ll allow for the vehicle to traverse the field while simultaneously connecting and fixing any mismatches of the detected rows on one edge of the field with the detected rows on the opposite edge of the field.
30. Regarding claim 14, Dix as modified by Vesperman does not explicitly teach the method for path planning of claim 13, wherein
the order of the first path segment of the reconnected second intermediate path
segment is one of higher than the order of the second path segment of the
reconnected second intermediate path segment if a distance between the sensor unit and the detected row increases while the sensor unit moves along the first intermediate path segment; or
lower than the order of the second path segment of the reconnected second
intermediate path segment if a distance between the sensor unit and the detected row decreases while the sensor unit moves along the first intermediate path segment.
However, Blume in the same field of endeavor, teaches the method for path planning of claim 13, wherein
the order of the first path segment of the reconnected second intermediate path
segment is one of higher than the order of the second path segment of the
reconnected second intermediate path segment if a distance between the sensor unit and the detected row increases while the sensor unit moves along the first intermediate path segment; or
lower than the order of the second path segment of the reconnected second
intermediate path segment if a distance between the sensor unit and the detected row decreases while the sensor unit moves along the first intermediate path segment (see [0083], [0089] Fig. 6a – 6b). Can connect the corner of a swath with another swath which is what is being implied by reconnecting a second intermediate path segment to a first path segment which is of a higher order of the second path segment. Blume is capable of reconnecting a second intermediate path segment to a first path segment of a higher order then the second path segment based off of the calculations and processes it can currently do. It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill to implement this feature in conjunction with Vesperman’s navigational guidance system as the sensor moves along the first intermediate path if the distance between the sensor unit and the detected row increases.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix as modified by Vesperman with the teachings of Blume, to have rows reconnected in order to have rows connected in an organized manner.
31. Regarding claim 15, Dix as modified by Vesperman does not explicitly teach the method for path planning of claim 14, further comprising:
if a third intermediate path segment out of the determined intermediate path
segments is connected with a first or a second path segment connected with the reconnected second intermediate path segment;
disconnecting the third intermediate path segment from the first or second path
segment connected with both the third and the reconnected second intermediate path segment; and
reconnecting the third intermediate path segment with a first or second path
segment of higher order than the order of the first or second path segment disconnected from the third intermediate path segment.
However, Blume in the same field of endeavor, teaches the method for path planning of claim 14, further comprising:
if a third intermediate path segment out of the determined intermediate path
segments is connected with a first or a second path segment connected with the reconnected second intermediate path segment;
disconnecting the third intermediate path segment from the first or second path
segment connected with both the third and the reconnected second intermediate path segment; and
reconnecting the third intermediate path segment with a first or second path
segment of higher order than the order of the first or second path segment disconnected from the third intermediate path segment (see [0083] Fig. 2 – 6b). Blume teaches a method that can detect irregularities and adjust or fix those irregularities. Blume is capable of producing an additional second path segment based off of the calculations and processes it can currently do. This feature can be used when Blume detects an irregularity where reconnecting a third immediate path segment needs to be disconnected and reconnected with a first or second path segment of higher order than the order of the first or second path segment disconnected from the third intermediate path segment. It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill to implement this feature.
and second ends of rows using the row vision system (120).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix as modified by Vesperman with the teachings of Blume, to have rows reconnected in order to have rows connected in an organized manner.
32. Regarding claim 16, Dix does not explicitly teach the method for path planning of claim 14, further comprising:
determining a turn path segment for connecting a first path segment connected
with one intermediate path segment with a first path segment connected with another intermediate path segment; wherein at least one of the one and the another intermediate path segments is connected with a second path segment.
However, Blume in the same field of endeavor, teaches the method for path planning of claim 14, further comprising:
determining a turn path segment for connecting a first path segment connected
with one intermediate path segment with a first path segment connected with another intermediate path segment; wherein at least one of the one and the another intermediate path segments is connected with a second path segment (see [0083], [0089] Fig. 6a – 6b). Can connect the corner of a swath with another swath which is what is being implied by reconnecting a second intermediate path segment to a first path segment which is of a higher order of the second path segment. Blume is capable of reconnecting a second intermediate path segment to a first path segment of a higher order then the second path segment based off of the calculations and processes it can currently do. It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill to implement this feature in conjunction with Vesperman’s navigational guidance system as the sensor moves along the first intermediate path if the distance between the sensor unit and the detected row increases.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix as modified by Vesperman with the teachings of Blume, to have rows reconnected in order to have rows connected in an organized manner.
33. Claim(s) 17 - 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No 20080103690A1 (hereinafter, “Dix”). and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220350991A1 (hereinafter, “Vesperman”), and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20210000006A1 (hereinafter, “Ellaboudy”), and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220382290A1 (hereinafter, “Blume”).
34. Regarding claim 17, Dix as modified by Vesperman does not explicitly teach the method for path planning of claim 1, further comprising:
detecting a row without a match with an intermediate path segment; determining an additional intermediate path segment matching with the detected row; and
connecting the additional intermediate path segment with a first or second path
segment disconnected from any other intermediate path segment.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ellaboudy teaches the method for path planning of claim 1, further comprising:
detecting a row without a match with an intermediate path segment; and determining an additional intermediate path segment matching with the detected row;
connecting the additional intermediate path segment with a first or second path
segment disconnected from any other intermediate path segment (see [0059], [0113], Fig. 6). Detected crop rows are matched with other crop rows. When crop rows are matched with other crop rows then inherently an intermediate path segment is determined and form between those two crop rows in order to connect them. That connection would have to be formed with a row that was detected prior which depending on where in the field that crop row was initially detected could be considered either a first or second path segment.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix as modified by Vesperman with the teachings of Ellaboudy, to be more certain that all rows have a match on the field and none go unmatched (see [0059], [0113], Fig. 6).
35. Regarding claim 18, Dix as modified by Vesperman and Ellaboudy does not explicitly teach the method for path planning of claim 17, further comprising: detecting a gap in a row; and determining a closing path segment for closing the gap.
However, Blume in the same field of endeavor, teaches the method for path planning of claim 17, further comprising: detecting a gap in a row; and determining a closing path segment for closing the gap (see [0069], [0072] – [0079] Fig. 6a). Detects an irregularity and fixes/adjusts the irregularity
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application with a reasonable expectation of success, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Dix as modified by Vesperman and Ellaboudy with the teachings of Blume, to have an agricultural system that can detect gaps in a row and fix said gaps in the middle of a row to have a field of continual rows (see [0069], [0072] – [0079] Fig. 6a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID MESQUITI OVALLE JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-6229. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 5pm EST.
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 on (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.
/DAVID MESQUITI OVALLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/Erin M Piateski/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669