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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/08/2024 and 03/20/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 last line: “based at least one the adjustment data” should be changed to read “based at least on
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakabayashi et al. (US 2020/0367434 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nakabayashi teaches:
A system for adjusting an agricultural machine (system as shown in Fig. 6) comprising:
a controller (Fig. 6; [0078] “control unit 7”) that receives input data indicative of auger slip ([0084] “The clog determining unit 73 includes an auger state determining unit 73A ... The auger state determining unit 73A determines drive abnormalities in the auger 3 on the basis of a detection signal from the auger rotation speed detection sensor 9.”), wherein the controller includes:
at least one processor (Fig. 6; [0078] “control unit 7”); and
a memory (Fig. 6; [0078] “control unit 7”) that stores instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, configure the at least one processor to:
generate auger slip data indicative of an auger slip condition based on the input data ([0084] “The auger state determining unit 73 A determines drive abnormalities in the auger 3 on the basis of a detection signal from the auger rotation speed detection sensor 9.”; [0085] “The drive abnormalities of the auger 3 include mechanical malfunctions, such as the chain of the auger power transmission mechanism 50 (see FIG. 4 hereinafter) breaking or coming off, the torque limiter 8 (see FIG. 4 hereinafter) operating, harvested culm becoming clogged and preventing the auger 3 from properly feeding the harvested culm laterally, and so on.”); and
generate adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to one or more components of the agricultural machine to mitigate the auger slip condition of the agricultural machine ([0089] “As such, the clog determining unit 73 outputs a speed reduction command for reducing the vehicle speed to the travel control unit 71 when it has been determined that a clog has formed in at least one of the auger 3 and the conveyance device 12 . Additionally, if a clog remains in at least one of the auger 3 and the conveyance device 12 for a set amount of time, the clog determining unit 73 outputs a vehicle stop command for stopping the vehicle body 1 to the travel control unit 71 in order to prevent the auger 3 or the conveyance device 12 from being damaged, prevent an engine stall, and so on. This is particularly useful when the auger power transmission mechanism 50 is constituted by a belt transmission mechanism which experiences slippage due to clogs relatively easily, because the rate of decrease in the rotation speed occurring at the time of a clog can have a wide range depending on the severity of the clog.”); and
one or more actuators that adjust the one or more components ([0082] “The travel control unit 71 outputs a control signal to operate the shift operation device 65 via the device control unit 62, in order to control the driving of the travel device 18.”) of the agricultural machine based at least on the adjustment data ([0089] “As such, the clog determining unit 73 outputs a speed reduction command for reducing the vehicle speed to the travel control unit 71 when it has been determined that a clog has formed in at least one of the auger 3 and the conveyance device 12.”).
Regarding claim 8, Nakabayashi further teaches:
wherein the memory further stores instructions that configure the processor to generate adjustment data indicative of an adjustment to a ground speed of an agricultural machine ([0089] “As such, the clog determining unit 73 outputs a speed reduction command for reducing the vehicle speed to the travel control unit 71 when it has been determined that a clog has formed in at least one of the auger 3 and the conveyance device 12.”), and
wherein the system further includes an electronic control unit ([0089] “travel control unit 71”) that adjusts the ground speed of the agricultural machine based at least on the adjustment data ([0089] “As such, the clog determining unit 73 outputs a speed reduction command for reducing the vehicle speed to the travel control unit 71 when it has been determined that a clog has formed in at least one of the auger 3 and the conveyance device 12 . Additionally, if a clog remains in at least one of the auger 3 and the conveyance device 12 for a set amount of time, the clog determining unit 73 outputs a vehicle stop command for stopping the vehicle body 1 to the travel control unit 71 in order to prevent the auger 3 or the conveyance device 12 from being damaged, prevent an engine stall, and so on. This is particularly useful when the auger power transmission mechanism 50 is constituted by a belt transmission mechanism which experiences slippage due to clogs relatively easily, because the rate of decrease in the rotation speed occurring at the time of a clog can have a wide range depending on the severity of the clog.”).
Regarding claim 14, Nakabayashi further teaches:
an operator interface ([0081] “A notification device 64 connected to the device control unit 62 notifies the driver, a supervisor, or the like of various happenings arising in the combine, and is a collective name for a lamp, a buzzer, a speaker, a display, and so on.”), wherein the memory further stores instructions that configure the processor to output an indication based on the adjustment data to the operator interface ([0090] “Accordingly, the notification control unit 74, which serves as the notification unit, can make a notification that the drive speed of the conveyance device 12 has decreased. A clog warning made when a clog has been determined, a vehicle speed decrease notification made when the speed reduction command has been output, a vehicle stop notification made when the vehicle stop command has been output, and so on can be given as examples of the drive abnormality warning.”).
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.
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 2020/0367434 A1), in view of Mueller et al. (US 2018/0199508 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein the one or more components include one or more of a cutter, an auger, a conditioner, a forming shield, or a swath flap.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mueller teaches:
wherein the one or more components include an auger ([0016] “A further embodiment of the invention provides that the control device is configured to predefine a desired revolution speed for the drive element of a belt conveyor drive of the cutting unit that is the higher, the higher an actual revolution speed value of the drive element of an intake auger of the cutting unit is. A particularly uniform harvest flow can be ensured in the cutting unit in this manner. Alternatively or additionally, the control device can be configured to determine the desired revolution speed value such that an actual torque value of the drive element remains beneath a predefined torque threshold value. This allows a torque limitation for overload protection. The drive system of the cutting unit can thus be spared overall.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi to determine adjustment to the one or more components including an auger, as taught by Mueller, in order to prevent overload in the drive system of the auger.
Regarding claim 3, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach at least two drive motors, wherein a first drive motor couples to at least a first component and a second drive motor couples to at least a second component.
However, Mueller teaches:
at least two drive motors ([0027] “the drives 25a-e are designed as purely electric drives and the rotatable drive shafts are formed by the motor shafts of these electric drives.”), wherein a first drive motor couples to at least a first component and a second drive motor couples to at least a second component ([0027] “The reel 15, the cutter bar 17, the belt conveyor 18, the intake auger 19, and the inclined conveyor 23 have respective drives 25a-e that are only shown in schematic form and that serve to set said working devices 17, 18, 29, 23 into a movement ... In the embodiment shown, the drives 25a-e are designed as purely electric drives and the rotatable drive shafts are formed by the motor shafts of these electric drives.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi to include two drive motors, wherein a first drive motor couples to at least a first component and a second drive motor couples to at least a second component, as taught by Mueller, in order to set the working devices into a movement in accordance with harvesting operation.
Regarding claim 4, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein the first component and the second component are respectively one of a header, an auger, or a conditioner roller, and the first component and the second component are different.
However, Mueller teaches:
wherein the first component and the second component are respectively one of a header ([0027] “the cutter bar 17”), or an auger ([0027] “the intake auger 19”), and the first component and the second component are different ([0027] “The reel 15, the cutter bar 17, the belt conveyor 18, the intake auger 19, and the inclined conveyor 23 have respective drives 25a-e that are only shown in schematic form and that serve to set said working devices 17, 18, 29, 23 into a movement ...”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi, in view of Mueller to include the first component and the second component are respectively one of an auger, or a header, and the first component and the second component are different, as taught by Mueller, in order to set the working devices into a movement in accordance with harvesting operation.
Regarding claim 5, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein at least one of the first drive motor or the second drive motor couples to at least two components.
However, Mueller teaches:
wherein at least one of the first drive motor or the second drive motor couples to at least two components ([0027] “The reel 15, the cutter bar 17, the belt conveyor 18, the intake auger 19, and the inclined conveyor 23 have respective drives 25a-e that are only shown in schematic form and that serve to set said working devices 17, 18, 29, 23 into a movement ... In the embodiment shown, the drives 25 a -e are designed as purely electric drives and the rotatable drive shafts are formed by the motor shafts of these electric drives.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi, in view of Muller, to include at least one of the first drive motor or the second drive motor couples to at least two components, as taught by Mueller, in order to set the working devices into a movement in accordance with harvesting operation.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 2020/0367434 A1), in view of Hamilton et al. (US 2023/0345878 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein the adjustment data indicates an increase in a speed of a header.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Hamilton teaches:
wherein the adjustment data indicates an increase in a speed of a header ([0038] “ In certain embodiments, the controller 17 may change a ground speed of the tractor 12 or header speed based on the expected or measured crop density, such as to have constant throughput in the header 14.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi to include adjustment data indicating an increase in a speed of a header, as taught by Hamilton, in order to maintain constant throughput of crop in the header.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 2020/0367434 A1), in view of Steidinger et al. (US 2021/0360857 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein the adjustment data indicates an increase in a roll gap.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Steidinger teaches:
wherein the adjustment data indicates an increase in a roll gap ([0032] “The roll-gap mechanism 150 generally includes control rods 151 and roll-gap actuators 152 that are operably connected to the control rods 151 via linkage mechanisms 153. The roll-gap mechanism 150 sets and adjusts the size of the roll gap RG.”; [0041] “After the initial roll gap size and/or tension force have been set, the controller 170 may use the initial roll gap size and tension force as a starting point for subsequent adjustments. The controller 170 may automatically adjust the tension actuator 144 to set the tension force and the roll-gap actuators 152 to set the roll gap RG upon receiving a further input command from the operator and/or a signal from one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163. For example, during operation of the crop conditioning device 120, the controller 170 may optimize the conditioning performance by monitoring the operational roll gap and subsequently adjusting the tension force to maintain the desired operational roll gap. The controller 170 may monitor the roll gap size, via one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163, and calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi to increase a roll gap, as taught by Steidinger, in order to optimize the conditioning performance and maintain a desired operational roll gap.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 2020/0367434 A1), in view of Rotole et al. (US 2018/0325029 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein the adjustment data indicates an adjustment to a forming shield and swath flap.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Rotole teaches:
wherein the adjustment data indicates an adjustment to a forming shield and swath flap ([0066] “ Furthermore, the shape, arrangement, density, or other characteristic of the windrow 112 may be quickly and easily adjusted by moving the swath flap 162 and/or the forming shields 167.”; [0071] “Moreover, by raising the swath flap 162 and moving the forming shields 167, the first inner windrow 306 may be made narrower than, for example, the fifth inner windrow 314 ... Accordingly, the amount of conditioning and the shape and placement of the windrows may be highly controllable. This may be useful, for example, for facilitating subsequent processing of the crop material, for controlling drying of the crop material, to separate weeds or other waste from useable crop material, etc.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi to adjust a forming shield and a swath flap, as taught by Rotole, in order to control the shape and placement of the windrows, which is useful for facilitating subsequent processing of the crop material, for controlling drying of the crop material, to separate weeds or other waste from useable crop material, etc.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 2020/0367434 A1), in view of Mueller et al. (US 2018/0199508 A1), and further in view of Hamilton et al. (US 2023/0345878 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein the adjustment data indicates an increase to an auger speed and a decrease to a header speed.
However, Mueller teaches: wherein the adjustment data indicates an increase to an auger speed ([0016] “A further embodiment of the invention provides that the control device is configured to predefine a desired revolution speed for the drive element of a belt conveyor drive of the cutting unit that is the higher, the higher an actual revolution speed value of the drive element of an intake auger of the cutting unit is. A particularly uniform harvest flow can be ensured in the cutting unit in this manner. Alternatively or additionally, the control device can be configured to determine the desired revolution speed value such that an actual torque value of the drive element remains beneath a predefined torque threshold value. This allows a torque limitation for overload protection. The drive system of the cutting unit can thus be spared overall.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi to include adjustment data indicating an increase to an auger speed, as taught by Mueller, in order to prevent overload in the drive system of the auger.
Mueller does not specifically teach wherein the adjustment data indicates a decrease to a header speed.
However, Hamilton teaches:
wherein the adjustment data indicates a decrease to a header speed ([0038] “ In certain embodiments, the controller 17 may change a ground speed of the tractor 12 or header speed based on the expected or measured crop density, such as to have constant throughput in the header 14.”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi, in view of Mueller, to include adjustment data indicating a decrease in a speed of a header, as taught by Hamilton, in order to maintain constant throughput of crop in the header.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 2020/0367434 A1), in view of Glade et al. (US 2019/0029182 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Nakabayashi does not specifically teach wherein the adjustment data indicates a reversal of a header and an auger.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Glade teaches:
wherein the adjustment data indicates a reversal of a header and an auger ([0034] “For instance, a slug or slugs of crop material may have a size that exceeds the variable gap between the upper and lower rolls of the front and/or rear pair of rolls 32-38, possibly causing header function to stall. One conventional procedure used to address this condition involves an operator causing the windrower 10 (FIG. 1) to stop, backing the windrower 10 up, and selecting a switch to reverse the rotation of the header 20 (e.g., activating the header reverse function) to unplug the header 20 (FIG. 1). For instance, in rotary style headers, activation of the header reverse function causes the entire header to run backwards (e.g., the conditioner, cutting discs, augers, cages, etc.). In sickle/auger style headers, activation of the header reverse function causes the conditioners and augers to run in reverse (though not the reel).”).
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 teachings of Nakabayashi to include adjustment data indicating a reversal of a header and an auger, as taught by Glade, in order to prevent the header from stalling when a slug or slugs of crop material with a size exceeding the variable gap between the upper and lower rolls of the front and/or rear pair of rolls.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
Claims 6-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 6 and similarly cited claim 15, Nakabayashi teaches the auger slip data is a ratio between the engine speed and the auger speed ([0086] “To avoid such erroneous clog determinations, the auger state determining unit 73A may be configured to determine a clog in the auger 3 by taking a ratio of the rotation speed of the engine 4 to the rotation speed of the auger shaft 30 and using a threshold of that ratio (a rate of decrease; a drop in the auger shaft rotation speed normalized according to the engine rotation speed).”). None of the cited prior art references specifically teaches or suggests “the auger slip data is a ration between the cutter bar speed and the auger speed” as required by claim 6 and similarly cited claim 15.
Regarding claim 20, none of the cited prior art references specifically teaches or suggests “wherein the header actuator and the auger actuator are decoupled and independent controllable by the controller” as required by claim 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Anderson (US 2021/0007277 A1) teaches adjusting subsystems such as header height and harvester speed in response to lodged crop detected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NHI Q BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-3962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 10:00 AM - 6:00PM 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, KHOI TRAN can be reached at (571) 272-6919. 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.
/NHI Q BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights