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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention II and invention III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/28/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I in the reply filed on 01/28/2026 is acknowledged.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed on 01/28/2026 regarding claims 1-20 is fully considered. Of the above claims, claims 15-20 have been canceled.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 4 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the recitations of “a distal end” in line 3, “a contact surface” in line 4 and “a distal end” in line 4 refer to previously recited limitations.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitation of “a second wandcomprising” in line 4 has a misspelling.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitations of “the first contact surface” and “the second contact surface” in line 5 lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 2, the recitation of “a distal end” in line 2 refers to a previously recited limitation.
Further regarding claim 2, the recitation of “the contact surfaces” in line 3 lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 4, the recitation of “a distal end” in line 2 refers to a previously recited limitation.
Further regarding claim 4, the recitation of “the contact surfaces” in line 3 lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 10, the recitation of “return the stalk sensor the home position” in lines 2-3 contains a grammatical error.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zielke et al. (US 2021/0329838 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zielke et al. teach a stalk sensor (sensor apparatus 50; FIG. 22) comprising:
a first wand comprising a contact surface at a distal end (wand 12A; FIG. 22);
a first magnet disposed at a distal end of the first wand (magnet 52A; FIG. 22); and
a second wand comprising a contact surface at a distal end (wand 12B; FIG. 22),
wherein the first contact surface and the second contact surface are in contact when the stalk sensor is in a home position (the wands 12A, 12B may be mounted at the same level and contact each other at the center of the measurement area when in a neutral or resting position; [0154]; FIG. 22).
Regarding claim 2, Zielke et al. teach a ferrous material disposed at a distal end of the second wand the ferrous material configured to attract the first magnet and thereby the first wand into contact with the second wand at the contact surfaces (spring steel; [0115]; steel of the wand 12B attracts magnet 52A; FIG. 22).
Regarding claim 3, Zielke et al. teach wherein the first wand and second wand are self-aligning along the horizontal axis (wand 12A and wand 12B are aligned along an axis intersecting a position where the wand 12A is attached to fixed element 16A and another position where the wand 12B is attached to fixed element 16B; FIG. 22).
Regarding claim 9, Zielke et al. teach a hinge shield configured to extend beyond a hinged portion of the first wand and restrict deflection of the first wand (the fixed elements 16A, 16B may also be used as mounting point for the wands 12A, 12B; [0151]; Figs 22-23; the mounting point of the wand 12 is considered as a hinge point; [0166]).
Regarding claim 12, Zielke et al. teach wherein the hinge shield is configured to be mounted to a harvester row unit (the various implementations include one or more sensing members mounted to a harvester row unit to engage with stalks as they enter the row unit; [0107]; Figs 4, 14-15).
Regarding claim 13, Zielke et al. teach wherein the first wand and second wand are configured to flex and separate the first contact surface and the second contact surface as a stalk passes through the stalk sensor (FIG. 23).
Regarding claim 14, Zielke et al. teach wherein the stalk sensor is configured to measure deflection of the first wand and second wand to count stalks as stalks pass through the sensor (the various sensing members are used in conjunction with various processing components to measure stalk perimeter, count stalks, detect missing and late emerged plants, and estimate and/or predict yield, among other functions; [0107]; a stalk sensing system 10 having resilient sensing members 12 utilized for detecting, evaluating and counting the presence of row crop stalks; [0110]; the magnetic sensors 54A, 54B on both sides of the sensor apparatus 50 measure the strength of the magnetic field produced by the corresponding magnet 52A, 52B in the corresponding wand 12A, 12B; [0152]; Figs 22-23).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zielke et al. (US 2021/0329838 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Zielke et al. teach a second magnet disposed at a distal end of the second wand, the magnet configured to attract the first magnet and thereby the first wand into contact with the second wand at the contact surfaces with the second wand (the dual wand sensor 40 includes two resilient wands 12A, 12B and permanent magnets 52A, 52B embedded in or attached to each wand 12A, 12B such that one of the poles of the magnet 52A, 52B is oriented outward to the surface of the wand 12A, 12B; [0151]). One of ordinary skill would have arranged the magnets 52A and 52B to attract one another for the purpose, in the resting position, the wand 12A is in contact with the wand 12B.
Regarding claim 5, Zielke et al. teach wherein a north pole of the first magnet is adjacent to the contact surface of the first wand and wherein a south pole of the second magnet is adjacent to the contact surface of the second wand (since the magnets 52A and 52B are adjacent to respective contact surfaces of the wands 12A and 12B, the north pole and south pole of the respective magnets 52A and 52B are also adjacent to the contact surfaces; FIG. 22).
Regarding claim 6, Zielke et al. teach wherein north and south poles of the first magnet and second magnet are each adjacent to the contact surfaces (since the magnets 52A and 52B are adjacent to respective contact surfaces of the wands 12A and 12B, the north pole and south pole of the respective magnets 52A and 52B are also adjacent to the contact surfaces; FIG. 22).
Regarding claim 7, Zielke et al. teach wherein poles of the first magnet and second magnet are oriented perpendicular to a direction of deflection of the first wand and second wand (the magnets 52 are disk magnets 52 that are embedded in the wand 12 with the poles of the magnet 52 perpendicular to the front and back, vertical, faces of the wand 12; [0164]; FIG. 27; deflection is perpendicular to the front and back direction; FIG. 23).
Regarding claim 8, Zielke et al. teach wherein the wands are self-aligning on horizontal and vertical axes (wands 12A and 12B are aligned to a front-back axis and a side-side axis intersecting a contact position; FIG. 22).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim(s) 10 is the inclusion of “a third magnet at a distal end of the hinge shield configured to attract a sensing magnet on the first wand and return the stalk sensor the home position”. These limitations, as they are claimed in the combination, have not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, making claim(s) 10 allowable over the prior art.
The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim(s) 11 is the inclusion of “a third magnet at a distal end of the hinge shield configured to repel a sensing magnet on the first wand and dampen movement of the first wand toward the home position”. These limitations, as they are claimed in the combination, have not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, making claim(s) 11 allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENDRICK X LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-3798. The examiner can normally be reached MWFSa 10am-8pm.
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, Douglas X Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
13 February 2026
/KENDRICK X LIU/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853