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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/19/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to Applicant Amendments and Remarks filed on 12/19/2025, for application number 18/481,350 filed on 10/05/2023, in which claims 1-20 were previously presented for examination.
Claims 1, 10, and 18 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant Amendments and Remarks filed on 12/19/2025 in response to the Final office action mailed on 09/19/2025 have been fully considered and are addressed as follows:
Regarding the Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 103: With respect to the previous claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant has amended independent claims and the amendments have changed the scope of the original application. Therefore, the Office has supplied new grounds for rejection attached below in the FINAL office action and therefore the prior arguments are considered moot.
Regarding independent claims 1, 10, and 18, Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant alleges that “Foster is silent as to controlling the operation of an actuator to adjust the position of any leveling disks based on determined sizes of soil clods” (Applicant Amendments and Remarks filed on 12/19/2025 at pg. 10). Examiner disagrees.
Foster discloses “an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly” as recited in claim 1. Foster states that “the various gangs 48 of disk blades 50 may be oriented at an angle relative to the travel direction 34 of the work vehicle 10 to promote more effective tilling of the soil” at para. [0024], “the implement 12 may also include any number of suitable actuators (e.g., hydraulic cylinders) for adjusting the relative positioning, penetration depth, and/or down force associated with the various ground-engaging tools 46, 50, 52, 54” at para. [0026], and “the implement 12 may include one or more second actuators 58 coupled to the disk forward frame 42 to adjust the penetration depth and/or the down pressure of the disk blades 50” at para. [0026]. As shown in FIG. 2, the actuators 58 necessarily adjust the position of the disc gangs 48 by adjusting the disc forward frame 42, which is the frame for the disc gangs 48.
Applicant further alleges that “Shearer is silent as to ganged disks, especially leveling disk gang assemblies, positioned aft of ground-engaging shanks” (Applicant Amendments and Remarks filed on 12/19/2025 at pg. 10). Examiner disagrees.
Shearer states “a leveling disk gang assembly mounted to the frame and positioned aft of the plurality of ground-engaging shanks in a longitudinal direction extending parallel to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement” as recited in claim 18.
Shearer states “the implement 10 may also include one or more harrows 44. As is generally understood, the harrows 44 may be configured to be pivotally coupled to the frame 20. The harrows 44 may include a plurality of ground-engaging tools 46, such as tines or discs” at para. [0020]. Therefore, the implement of Shearer includes a disc harrow. American society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers defines “disk harrow” as “A primary or secondary tillage implement consisting of two or four gangs of concave disks. Adjustment of gang angle controls cutting aggressiveness” (ASAE S414.1 FEB04 Terminology and Definitions for Agricultural Tillage Implements at pg. 290). Therefore, the disc harrow of Shearer includes disc gangs. Further, the disc harrow 44 of Shearer is positioned aft of ground-engaging tools 42 (e.g., shanks) as shown in FIG. 1 and stated at para. [0019].
The remainder of the Applicant’s arguments are associated with the newly added limitations. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments are rendered moot in light of the new grounds of rejection outlined below, which were necessitated by the applicant’s amendment.
For at least the foregoing reasons, and the rejections outlined below, the prior art rejections are maintained.
NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
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 1-4, 8, 10-13, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster et al. (US 2021/0176909 A1) in view of Shearer et al. (US 2020/0113123 A1) further in view of Kohn et al. (US 2014/0262370 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Foster et al. discloses a system for controlling the operation of an agricultural implement, the system comprising:
an agricultural implement (Foster et al. at para. [0020]: “FIG. 1 illustrates a perspective view of the work vehicle 10 towing the implement 12 (e.g., across a field)”), comprising:
a plurality of ground-engaging shanks configured to engage soil of a field (Foster et al. at para. [0023]: “the central frame 40 may correspond to a shank frame configured to support a plurality of ground-engaging shanks 46”); and
a leveling disk gang assembly (Foster et al. at para. [0022]: “a plurality of ground-engaging tools, such as a plurality of shanks, disk blades, leveling blades, basket assemblies, and/or the like. In several embodiments, the various ground-engaging tools may be configured to perform a tillage operation across the field along which the implement 12 is being towed”; para. [0024]: “the forward frame 42 may correspond to a disk frame configured to support various gangs or sets 48 of disk blades 50”);
an imaging device configured to generate data indicative of sizes of soil clods present within a portion of a field forward or aft of the plurality of leveling disk blades relative to the direction of travel of the agricultural implement (Foster et al. at para. [0030]: “the imaging device(s) may correspond to any suitable device(s) configured to capture images or other image data of the soil surface of the field that allows the soil clods present on the top surface of the field to be identified”);
an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Foster et al. at para. [0026]: “the implement 12 may include one or more second actuators 58 coupled to the disk forward frame 42 to adjust the penetration depth and/or the down pressure of the disk blades 50”); and
a computing system communicatively coupled to the imaging device, the computing system configured to:
determine the sizes of the soil clods based on the data generated by the imaging device (Foster et al. at para. [0036]: “the controller 102 may be configured to analyze the received images (e.g., using edge detection and/or boundary tracing techniques) to estimate or determine the size(s) of one or more soil clods present on the surface of the field”); and
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: when the soil clod size(s) determined by the controller 102 exceeds a maximum soil clod size threshold, the control module 136 may be configured to fine-tune the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner designed to adjust the sizes of the soil clods present on the surface of the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state:
a leveling disk gang assembly positioned aft of the plurality of ground-engaging shanks in a longitudinal direction extending parallel to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement,
an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by a longitudinal direction extending parallel to the direction of travel and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction,
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction based on the determined sizes of the soil clods.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
In the same field of endeavor, Shearer et al. teaches a leveling disk gang assembly positioned aft of the plurality of ground-engaging shanks in a longitudinal direction extending parallel to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement (Shearer et al. at para. [0019]: “the cultivator 40 may include a plurality of ground-engaging tools 42 (e.g., shanks)”; para. [0020]: “the implement 10 may also include one or more harrows 44. As is generally understood, the harrows 44 may be configured to be pivotally coupled to the frame 20. The harrows 44 may include a plurality of ground-engaging tools 46, such as tines or discs”; The implement of Shearer includes a disc harrow. American society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers defines “disk harrow” as “A primary or secondary tillage implement consisting of two or four gangs of concave disks. Adjustment of gang angle controls cutting aggressiveness” (ASAE S414.1 FEB04 Terminology and Definitions for Agricultural Tillage Implements, https://efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/references/public/ME/tillage_implements.pdf, 2006 at pg. 290). Therefore, Shearer’s disc harrow includes disc gangs. Further, the disc harrow 44 of Shearer is positioned aft of ground-engaging tools 42 (e.g., shanks) as shown in FIG. 1 and stated at para. [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. by positioning the disk gang assembly aft of the shanks as taught by Shearer et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. is to provide any suitable combination of ground engaging tools (see Shearer et al. at para. [0022]).
However, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. does not explicitly state:
an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by a longitudinal direction extending parallel to the direction of travel and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction,
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction based on the determined sizes of the soil clods.
In the same field of endeavor, Kohn et al. teaches an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by a longitudinal direction extending parallel to the direction of travel and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; para. [0050]: Such changing conditions can be easily adjusted for, from the tractor cab, with hydraulic operators for adjusting the disc gang angles”),
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction based on the determined sizes of the soil clods (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; para. [0050]: Such changing conditions can be easily adjusted for, from the tractor cab, with hydraulic operators for adjusting the disc gang angles”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. by adding the actuator of Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Specifically, as disclosed by Foster et al., the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]). To increase the force applied to the work implement, it is obvious to one in the ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller of Foster et al. to change the disc gang angles as taught by Kohn et al. (see Kohn et al. at para. [0049]-[0050]).
Regarding claim 2, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the system of claim 1.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the computing system is configured to:
compare the determined sizes of the soil clods to a predetermined size range (Foster et al. at para. [0059]: “the controller 102 may be configured to compare the determined size(s) of the soil clod(s) to a predetermined maximum clod size. Thereafter, when the determined size(s) of the soil clod( s) exceeds the predetermined maximum clod size (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) is too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operating parameter(s) of the vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner that reduces the size(s) of the soil clod(s) within the field”); and
control the operation of the actuator to adjust (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle in a horizontal plane to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the system of claim 2.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the computing system is further configured to:
control the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at FIG. 12 and para. [0023]: “the rear disc gangs are illustrated at a more substantial angle for more aggressive horizontal soil disturbance and residue entrainment in the soil”; para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; As shown in FIG. 12, an oblique angle is defined between the disc gangs 80 and the centerline parallel to the longitudinal direction (i.e., the direction of travel)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the oblique angle as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to increase the gang angle to increase aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 4, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the system of claim 2.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the computing system is further configured to:
control the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0036]: “the controller 102 may also be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12, as necessary, to ensure that the soil clod size of the field is maintained at a given target value and/or within a given target range”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement to ensure that the soil clod size is maintained within a given target range (see Foster et al. at para. [0036]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at claim 10: “the tractor operator can independently selectively increase and decrease the operating angles of the rear disc gangs between positions generally perpendicular to the line of travel of the implement and positions rearwardly angled from the perpendicular”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to decrease the gang angle to accommodate minimal tillage under a wide variety of soil conditions (see Kohn et al. at para. [0049]).
Regarding claim 8, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the system of claim 1.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein the imaging device is configured as a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensor (Foster et al. at para. [0030]: “the imaging device(s) may correspond to a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) device(s)”).
Regarding claim 10, Foster et al. discloses a method for controlling the operation of an agricultural implement, the method comprising:
receiving, with a computing system, image data indicative of sizes of soil clods present within a portion of a field forward or aft of a plurality of leveling disk blades of a leveling disk gang assembly of an agricultural implement relative to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement (Foster et al. at para. [0029]: “the imaging device(s) may be provided in operative association with the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 such that the imaging device(s) has a field of view directed towards a portion(s) of the field disposed in front of, behind, and/or along one or both of the sides of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 as the implement 12 is being towed across the field”),
determining, with the computing system, the sizes of the soil clods based on the received image data (Foster et al. at para. [0018]: “The captured images may then be analyzed by an associated controller to determine the size( s) of one or more soil clods present on the surface of the field”); and
controlling, with the computing system, an operation of an actuator of the agricultural implement to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: when the soil clod size(s) determined by the controller 102 exceeds a maximum soil clod size threshold, the control module 136 may be configured to fine-tune the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner designed to adjust the sizes of the soil clods present on the surface of the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state:
the leveling disk gang assembly positioned aft of a plurality of ground-engaging shanks of the agricultural implement relative to the direction of travel of the agricultural implement,
adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by a longitudinal direction extending parallel to the direction of travel and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
In the same field of endeavor, Shearer teaches the leveling disk gang assembly positioned aft of a plurality of ground-engaging shanks of the agricultural implement relative to the direction of travel of the agricultural implement (Shearer et al. at para. [0019]: “the cultivator 40 may include a plurality of ground-engaging tools 42 (e.g., shanks)”; para. [0020]: “the implement 10 may also include one or more harrows 44. As is generally understood, the harrows 44 may be configured to be pivotally coupled to the frame 20. The harrows 44 may include a plurality of ground-engaging tools 46, such as tines or discs”; The implement of Shearer includes a disc harrow. American society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers defines “disk harrow” as “A primary or secondary tillage implement consisting of two or four gangs of concave disks. Adjustment of gang angle controls cutting aggressiveness” (ASAE S414.1 FEB04 Terminology and Definitions for Agricultural Tillage Implements, https://efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/references/public/ME/tillage_implements.pdf, 2006 at pg. 290). Therefore, Shearer’s disc harrow includes disc gangs. Further, the disc harrow 44 of Shearer is positioned aft of ground-engaging tools 42 (e.g., shanks) as shown in FIG. 1 and stated at para. [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. by positioning the disk gang assembly aft of the shanks as taught by Shearer et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. is to provide any suitable combination of ground engaging tools (see Shearer et al. at para. [0022]).
However, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. does not explicitly state adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by a longitudinal direction extending parallel to the direction of travel and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction.
In the same field of endeavor, Kohn et al. teaches adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by a longitudinal direction extending parallel to the direction of travel and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; para. [0050]: Such changing conditions can be easily adjusted for, from the tractor cab, with hydraulic operators for adjusting the disc gang angles”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. by adding the position adjustment as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Specifically, as disclosed by Foster et al., the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]). To increase the force applied to the work implement, it is obvious to one in the ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller of Foster et al. to change the disc gang angles in a horizontal plane as taught by Kohn et al. (see Kohn et al. at para. [0049]-[0050]).
Regarding claim 11, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the method of claim 10.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the method further comprises:
comparing, with the computing system, the determined sizes of the soil clods to a predetermined size range (Foster et al. at para. [0059]: “the controller 102 may be configured to compare the determined size(s) of the soil clod(s) to a predetermined maximum clod size. Thereafter, when the determined size(s) of the soil clod( s) exceeds the predetermined maximum clod size (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) is too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operating parameter(s) of the vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner that reduces the size(s) of the soil clod(s) within the field”); and
controlling, with the computing system, the operation of the actuator to adjust (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 12, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the method of claim 11.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the method further comprises:
controlling, with the computing system, the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at FIG. 12 and para. [0023]: “the rear disc gangs are illustrated at a more substantial angle for more aggressive horizontal soil disturbance and residue entrainment in the soil”; para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; As shown in FIG. 12, an oblique angle is defined between the disc gangs 80 and the centerline parallel to the longitudinal direction (i.e., the direction of travel)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to increase the gang angle to increase aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 13, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the method of claim 11.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the method further comprises:
controlling, with the computing system, the operation of the actuator to range (Foster et al. at para. [0036]: “the controller 102 may also be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12, as necessary, to ensure that the soil clod size of the field is maintained at a given target value and/or within a given target range”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement to ensure that the soil clod size is maintained within a given target range (see Foster et al. at para. [0036]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at claim 10: “the tractor operator can independently selectively increase and decrease the operating angles of the rear disc gangs between positions generally perpendicular to the line of travel of the implement and positions rearwardly angled from the perpendicular”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to decrease the gang angle to accommodate minimal tillage under a wide variety of soil conditions (see Kohn et al. at para. [0049]).
Regarding claim 18, Foster et al. discloses an agricultural implement, comprising:
a frame (Foster et al. at FIG. 1 and para. [0022]: “FIGS. 1 and 2, the implement 12 may generally include a carriage frame assembly 30 configured to be towed by the work vehicle 10”);
a plurality of ground-engaging shanks mounted to the frame and configured to engage soil of a field as the agricultural implement travels across the field (Foster et al. at para. [0022]: “a plurality of ground-engaging tools, such as a plurality of shanks, disk blades, leveling blades, basket assemblies, and/or the like. In several embodiments, the various ground-engaging tools may be configured to perform a tillage operation across the field along which the implement 12 is being towed”);
a leveling disk gang assembly mounted to the frame and (Foster et al. at para. [0024]: “the forward frame 42 may correspond to a disk frame configured to support various gangs or sets 48 of disk blades 50”);
an imaging device configured to generate data indicative of sizes of soil clods present within a portion of the field forward or aft of the plurality of leveling disk blades relative to the direction of travel of the agricultural implement (Foster et al. at para. [0030]: “the imaging device(s) may correspond to any suitable device(s) configured to capture images or other image data of the soil surface of the field that allows the soil clods present on the top surface of the field to be identified”);
an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Foster et al. at para. [0026]: “the implement 12 may include one or more second actuators 58 coupled to the disk forward frame 42 to adjust the penetration depth and/or the down pressure of the disk blades 50”); and
a computing system communicatively coupled to the imaging device, the computing system configured to:
determine the sizes of the soil clods based on the data generated by the imaging device (Foster et al. at para. [0036]: “the controller 102 may be configured to analyze the received images (e.g., using edge detection and/or boundary tracing techniques) to estimate or determine the size(s) of one or more soil clods present on the surface of the field”); and
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: when the soil clod size(s) determined by the controller 102 exceeds a maximum soil clod size threshold, the control module 136 may be configured to fine-tune the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner designed to adjust the sizes of the soil clods present on the surface of the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state:
a leveling disk gang assembly mounted to the frame and positioned aft of the plurality of ground-engaging shanks in a longitudinal direction extending parallel to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement,
an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by the longitudinal direction and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction,
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction based on the determined sizes of the soil clods.
In the same field of endeavor, Shearer et al. teaches a leveling disk gang assembly mounted to the frame and positioned aft of the plurality of ground-engaging shanks in a longitudinal direction extending parallel to a direction of travel of the agricultural implement (Shearer et al. at para. [0019]: “the cultivator 40 may include a plurality of ground-engaging tools 42 (e.g., shanks)”; para. [0020]: “the implement 10 may also include one or more harrows 44. As is generally understood, the harrows 44 may be configured to be pivotally coupled to the frame 20. The harrows 44 may include a plurality of ground-engaging tools 46, such as tines or discs”; The implement of Shearer includes a disc harrow. American society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers defines “disk harrow” as “A primary or secondary tillage implement consisting of two or four gangs of concave disks. Adjustment of gang angle controls cutting aggressiveness” (ASAE S414.1 FEB04 Terminology and Definitions for Agricultural Tillage Implements, https://efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/references/public/ME/tillage_implements.pdf, 2006 at pg. 290). Therefore, Shearer’s disc harrow includes disc gangs. Further, the disc harrow 44 of Shearer is positioned aft of ground-engaging tools 42 (e.g., shanks) as shown in FIG. 1 and stated at para. [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the agricultural implement of Foster et al. by positioning the disk gang assembly aft of the shanks as taught by Shearer et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the agricultural implement of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. is to provide any suitable combination of ground engaging tools (see Shearer et al. at para. [0022]).
However, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. does not explicitly state an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by the longitudinal direction and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction,
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction based on the determined sizes of the soil clods.
In the same field of endeavor, Kohn et al. teaches an actuator configured to adjust a position of the leveling disk gang assembly within a plane defined by the longitudinal direction and a lateral direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; para. [0050]: “Such changing conditions can be easily adjusted for, from the tractor cab, with hydraulic operators for adjusting the disc gang angles”),
control an operation of the actuator to adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction based on the determined sizes of the soil clods (Kohn et al. at para. [0043]: “the hydraulic controls (not shown) of a tractor”; para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; para. [0050]: “As an increasing result of modern agricultural methods and equipment, a large field being tilled may have different portions upon which different crops were grown the previous year, resulting in different residue conditions and tillage requirements. Also, it may be desirable to set the disc gangs at a greater angle when tilling hard soil in portions of a field and at a lesser angle when tilling soft or wet portions of a field” “Such changing conditions can be easily adjusted for, from the tractor cab, with hydraulic operators for adjusting the disc gang angles”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the agricultural implement of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. by adding the actuator of Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the agricultural implement of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 19, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the agricultural implement of claim 18.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the computing system is configured to:
compare the determined sizes of the soil clods to a predetermined size range (Foster et al. at para. [0059]: “the controller 102 may be configured to compare the determined size(s) of the soil clod(s) to a predetermined maximum clod size. Thereafter, when the determined size(s) of the soil clod( s) exceeds the predetermined maximum clod size (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) is too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operating parameter(s) of the vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner that reduces the size(s) of the soil clod(s) within the field”); and
control the operation of the actuator to adjust (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the agricultural implement of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the agricultural implement of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 20, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the agricultural implement of claim 18.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein the imaging device is configured as a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensor (Foster et al. at para. [0030]: “the imaging device(s) may correspond to a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) device(s)”).
Claims 5-7 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari (US 2021/0235609 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the system of claim 1.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the computing system is further configured to:
compare the determined sizes of the soil clods to a predetermined size range (Foster et al. at para. [0059]: “the controller 102 may be configured to compare the determined size(s) of the soil clod(s) to a predetermined maximum clod size. Thereafter, when the determined size(s) of the soil clod( s) exceeds the predetermined maximum clod size (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) is too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operating parameter(s) of the vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner that reduces the size(s) of the soil clod(s) within the field”);
compare the determined (Foster et al. at para. [0059]: “the controller 102 may be configured to compare the determined size(s) of the soil clod(s) to a predetermined maximum clod size”); and
control the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state determine a quantity of the soil clods that exceed a maximum value of the predetermined size range; and adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
In the same field of endeavor, Ferrari teaches determine a quantity of the soil clods that exceed a maximum value of the predetermined size range (Ferrari at para. [0044]: “the one or more variables listed above with soil roughness Sr values obtained via measurements, including but not limited to the number of clods having sizes in certain ranges per unit area of soil”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by replacing the size of Foster et al. with the quantity of Ferrari with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to sense the roughness or finish of soil and adjust the operating characteristics of an implement to adjust the soil finish within acceptable limits (see Ferrari at para. [0010]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 6, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari teaches the system of claim 5.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the computing system is further configured to:
control the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction and quantity.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at FIG. 12 and para. [0023]: “the rear disc gangs are illustrated at a more substantial angle for more aggressive horizontal soil disturbance and residue entrainment in the soil”; para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; As shown in FIG. 12, an oblique angle is defined between the disc gangs 80 and the centerline parallel to the longitudinal direction (i.e., the direction of travel)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to provide a mechanism to increase the gang angle to increase aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Ferrari further teaches quantity (Ferrari at para. [0044]: “the one or more variables listed above with soil roughness Sr values obtained via measurements, including but not limited to the number of clods having sizes in certain ranges per unit area of soil”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by replacing the size of Foster et al. with the quantity of Ferrari with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to sense the roughness or finish of soil and adjust the operating characteristics of an implement to adjust the soil finish within acceptable limits (see Ferrari at para. [0010]).
Regarding claim 7, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari teaches the system of claim 5.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the computing system is further configured to:
control the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0036]: “the controller 102 may also be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12, as necessary, to ensure that the soil clod size of the field is maintained at a given target value and/or within a given target range”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction and quantity.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement to ensure that the soil clod size is maintained within a given target range (see Foster et al. at para. [0036]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at claim 10: “the tractor operator can independently selectively increase and decrease the operating angles of the rear disc gangs between positions generally perpendicular to the line of travel of the implement and positions rearwardly angled from the perpendicular”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to provide a mechanism to decrease the gang angle to accommodate minimal tillage under a wide variety of soil conditions (see Kohn et al. at para. [0049]).
Ferrari further teaches quantity (Ferrari at para. [0044]: “the one or more variables listed above with soil roughness Sr values obtained via measurements, including but not limited to the number of clods having sizes in certain ranges per unit area of soil”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by replacing the size of Foster et al. with the quantity of Ferrari with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to sense the roughness or finish of soil and adjust the operating characteristics of an implement to adjust the soil finish within acceptable limits (see Ferrari at para. [0010]).
Regarding claim 14, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the method of claim 10.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the method further comprises:
comparing, with the computing system, the determined sizes of the soil clods to a predetermined size range (Foster et al. at para. [0059]: “the controller 102 may be configured to compare the determined size(s) of the soil clod(s) to a predetermined maximum clod size. Thereafter, when the determined size(s) of the soil clod( s) exceeds the predetermined maximum clod size (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) is too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operating parameter(s) of the vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 in a manner that reduces the size(s) of the soil clod(s) within the field”);
comparing, with the computing system, the determined (Foster et al. at para. [0059]: “the controller 102 may be configured to compare the determined size(s) of the soil clod(s) to a predetermined maximum clod size”); and
controlling, with the computing system, the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state determining, with the computing system, a quantity of the soil clods that exceed the predetermined size range; and adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
In the same field of endeavor, Ferrari teaches determining, with the computing system, a quantity of the soil clods that exceed the predetermined size range (Ferrari at para. [0044]: “the one or more variables listed above with soil roughness Sr values obtained via measurements, including but not limited to the number of clods having sizes in certain ranges per unit area of soil”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by replacing the size of Foster et al. with the quantity of Ferrari with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to sense the roughness or finish of soil and adjust the operating characteristics of an implement to adjust the soil finish within acceptable limits (see Ferrari at para. [0010]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly (Kohn et al. at para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to provide a mechanism to adjust the gang angle to change aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 15, Foster et al. in view of in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari teaches the method of claim 14.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the method further comprises:
controlling, with the computing system, the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0046]: “when it is determined that the soil clod size(s) exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (thereby indicating that the soil clod(s) present within the field are too large), the control module 136 may be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12 to decrease the size of the soil present within the field”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction and quantity.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement when it is determined that the size of the soil clod exceeds a predetermined maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0046] and claim 8). Foster et al. also suggests that the controller increases the force applied to the work implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum clod size (see Foster et al. at para. [0048]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at FIG. 12 and para. [0023]: “the rear disc gangs are illustrated at a more substantial angle for more aggressive horizontal soil disturbance and residue entrainment in the soil”; para. [0049]: “The universal custom field preparation implement 70 of the invention can be configured to enable front and rear disc gang angles of from approximately 0 degrees to more than 13 degrees to accommodate both minimal and more aggressive tillage under a wide variety of soil and moisture conditions”; As shown in FIG. 12, an oblique angle is defined between the disc gangs 80 and the centerline parallel to the longitudinal direction (i.e., the direction of travel)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to provide a mechanism to increase the gang angle to increase aggressiveness of tillage (see Kohn et al. at para. [0050]).
Ferrari further teaches quantity (Ferrari at para. [0044]: “the one or more variables listed above with soil roughness Sr values obtained via measurements, including but not limited to the number of clods having sizes in certain ranges per unit area of soil”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by replacing the size of Foster et al. with the quantity of Ferrari with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to sense the roughness or finish of soil and adjust the operating characteristics of an implement to adjust the soil finish within acceptable limits (see Ferrari at para. [0010]).
Regarding claim 16, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari teaches the method of claim 14.
Foster et al. further discloses wherein, when controlling the operation of the actuator, the method further comprises:
controlling, with the computing system, the operation of the actuator to (Foster et al. at para. [0036]: “the controller 102 may also be configured to adjust the operation of the work vehicle 10 and/or the implement 12, as necessary, to ensure that the soil clod size of the field is maintained at a given target value and/or within a given target range”).
However, Foster et al. does not explicitly state adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction and quantity.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of actively adjusting an operating parameter of at least one of the work implement to ensure that the soil clod size is maintained within a given target range (see Foster et al. at para. [0036]).
Kohn et al. further teaches adjust the position of the leveling disk gang assembly within the plane defined by the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction whereby one of a non-oblique angle or an oblique angle is defined between the leveling disk gang assembly and a centerline of the agricultural implement parallel to the longitudinal direction (Kohn et al. at claim 10: “the tractor operator can independently selectively increase and decrease the operating angles of the rear disc gangs between positions generally perpendicular to the line of travel of the implement and positions rearwardly angled from the perpendicular”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by adding the position adjustment of the gang assembly as taught by Kohn et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to provide a mechanism to decrease the gang angle to accommodate minimal tillage under a wide variety of soil conditions (see Kohn et al. at para. [0049]).
Ferrari further teaches quantity (Ferrari at para. [0044]: “the one or more variables listed above with soil roughness Sr values obtained via measurements, including but not limited to the number of clods having sizes in certain ranges per unit area of soil”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari by replacing the size of Foster et al. with the quantity of Ferrari with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Ferrari is to sense the roughness or finish of soil and adjust the operating characteristics of an implement to adjust the soil finish within acceptable limits (see Ferrari at para. [0010]).
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Lund et al. (US 11,497,154 B1).
Regarding claim 9, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the system of claim 2.
However, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. does not explicitly state wherein the computing system is further configured to:
initiate notification of an operator of the agricultural implement when the determined sizes of the soil clods fall outside of the predetermined size range.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of controlling the implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (see Foster et al. at para. [0046]).
In the same field of endeavor, Lund et al. teaches wherein the computing system is further configured to:
initiate notification of an operator of the agricultural implement when the determined sizes of the soil clods fall outside of the predetermined size range (Lund et al. at col. 7, ln. 42-46: “various sensors can be provided on the implement to monitor and measure effects of adjustments to implement settings, including soil moisture, temperature, tillage depth, surface roughness, cloddiness, seedbed compactness and evenness”; col. 7, ln. 50-53: “the controller 11 will receive and use data from these sensors to provide decision support for the control system 11 to adjust the implement setting to achieve a desired surface roughness/cloddiness”; col. 10, ln. 52-60: “The algorithm can use preset thresholds for field conditions, or the controller can allow an operator to set desired thresholds for field conditions. The controller can then either alert the operator when such thresholds are met based on data from the first and second optical sensors, or the controller can make automatic adjustments of the implement settings to achieve the desired optimized field operations and implement settings”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the notification as taught by Lund et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the system of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Lund et al. is to support decision making of an operator (see Lund et al. at col. 1, ln. 54-58).
Regarding claim 17, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. teaches the method of claim 11.
However, Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. does not explicitly state further comprising:
initiating, with the computing system, notification of an operator of the agricultural implement when the determined sizes of the soil clods fall outside of the predetermined size range.
Nevertheless, Foster et al. at least suggests the idea of controlling the implement when the soil clod size exceeds the maximum soil clod size threshold (see Foster et al. at para. [0046]).
In the same field of endeavor, Lund et al. teaches further comprising:
initiating, with the computing system, notification of an operator of the agricultural implement when the determined sizes of the soil clods fall outside of the predetermined size range (Lund et al. at col. 7, ln. 42-46: “various sensors can be provided on the implement to monitor and measure effects of adjustments to implement settings, including soil moisture, temperature, tillage depth, surface roughness, cloddiness, seedbed compactness and evenness”; col. 7, ln. 50-53: “the controller 11 will receive and use data from these sensors to provide decision support for the control system 11 to adjust the implement setting to achieve a desired surface roughness/cloddiness”; col. 10, ln. 52-60: “The algorithm can use preset thresholds for field conditions, or the controller can allow an operator to set desired thresholds for field conditions. The controller can then either alert the operator when such thresholds are met based on data from the first and second optical sensors, or the controller can make automatic adjustments of the implement settings to achieve the desired optimized field operations and implement settings”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. by adding the notification as taught by Lund et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify the method of Foster et al. in view of Shearer et al. further in view of Kohn et al. and Lund et al. is to support decision making of an operator (see Lund et al. at col. 1, ln. 54-58).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be found in the attached PTO-892 form.
Saito (JP 2024033715 A) discloses discs 10 with adjustable gang angle positioned aft of shanks 49 (Saito at FIG. 1, 3-4, and 9-11; para. [0073]). The above statement is based on the machine translation of Saito, a copy of which is attached to this Office Action as also indicated in the 892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JISUN CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-0710. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 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, Scott Browne can be reached at (571)270-0151. 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.
/JISUN CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666