DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 of prior U.S. Patent No. US11839184B2. Removing the underlined portions of U.S. Patent application no. US11839184B2 in view of Mase et al. (US 20180252694) show the obvious-type double patenting.
Patent No. US11839184B2
Instant Application
1. A system for predicting soil moisture at a first property based on a triggering event, and managing an irrigation system at the first property in response to the triggering event the system comprising:
a processor in communication with a prediction system and a database; and
a storage medium storing instructions that, when executed, configure the processor to:
establish a baseline watering schedule comprising one or more baseline watering events;
receive at least one of weather data and water flow data;
filter the at least one of weather data and water flow data to determine if a potential triggering event has occurred;
where the potential triggering event has occurred, comparing at least one feature of the potential triggering event to at least one model feature of stored historical triggering event models to determine a correlation value between the potential triggering event and stored historical triggering events, the at least one model feature including at least one of type, location, date, time, and amount;
where the correlation value is above a predetermined threshold, making a soil moisture prediction for the first property based on the at least one stored historical triggering event model; and
where soil moisture prediction for the first property will increase within a predetermined amount of time of a baseline watering event, delaying the baseline watering event.
A method for predicting soil moisture at a first location, the method comprising:
receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;
identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location;
based on the triggering event, predicting a predicted soil moisture level at the first location; and
based on the predicted soil moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location.
Regarding Claim 1, US patent application’184 silent about “receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location; identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location”
Mase teaches a method (fig. 3-4); receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location (S11: fig. 3; sensor(first area): fig. 4); identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, wherein the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location(S15:fig. 3; amount of rainfall:[0065]-[0068]);
Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to in order to provide the similar way for A method for predicting soil moisture at a first location.
Claims 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 of prior U.S. Patent No. US11432485B2. Removing the underlined portions of U.S. Patent application no. US11432485B2 in view of Mase et al. (US 20180252694) show the obvious-type double patenting.
Patent No. US11432485B2
Instant Application
1. A system for predicting soil moisture at a first property based on a triggering event, and managing an irrigation system at the first property in response to the triggering event the system comprising:
a processor in communication with a prediction system and a database; and
a storage medium storing instructions that, when executed, configure the processor to:
establish a baseline watering schedule comprising one or more baseline watering events;
receive at least one of real-time weather data, real-time water flow data, and real-time soil moisture data;
filter the at least one of real-time weather data, real-time water flow data, and real-time soil moisture data to determine if a potential triggering event has occurred;
where the potential triggering event has occurred, comparing at least one feature of the potential triggering event to at least one model feature of stored historical triggering event models to determine a correlation value between the potential triggering event and stored historical triggering events, the at least one model feature including at least one of type, location, date, time, and amount;
where the correlation value is above a predetermined threshold, making a soil moisture prediction for the first property based on the at least one stored historical triggering event model; and
where soil moisture prediction for the first property will increase within a predetermined amount of time of a baseline watering event, delaying the baseline watering event.
A method for predicting soil moisture at a first location, the method comprising:
receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;
identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location;
based on the triggering event, predicting a predicted soil moisture level at the first location; and
based on the predicted soil moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location.
Regarding Claim 1, US patent application’485 silent about “receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location; identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location”
Mase teaches a method (fig. 3-4); receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location (S11: fig. 3; sensor(first area): fig. 4); identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, wherein the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location(S15:fig. 3; amount of rainfall:[0065]-[0068]); based on the triggering event, predicting a predicted soil moisture level at the first location(s18: fig. 3)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to in order to provide the similar way for A method for predicting soil moisture at a first location.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 18-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Each of claims 18-37 falls within one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP § 2106.03. For example, each of claims 18-36 fall within category of process and claim 37 fall within category of machine, i.e., a “concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices.” Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348–49, 111 USPQ2d at 1719 (quoting Burr v. Duryee, 68 U.S. 531, 570, 17 L. Ed. 650, 657 (1863)).
Regarding claims 18-31
Step 2A – Prong 1
Exemplary claim 18 is directed to an abstract idea of predicting soil moisture at a first location.
The abstract idea is set forth or described by the following italicized limitations:
18. A method for predicting soil moisture at a first location, the method comprising:
receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;
identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location;
based on the triggering event, predicting a predicted soil moisture level at the first location; and
based on the predicted soil moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location.
The italicized limitations above represent a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment). Therefore, the italicized limitations fall within the subject matter groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in Section I of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
For example, the limitation “identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event[..];[..] predicting a predicted soil moisture level[..];[..]adjusting a baseline watering event[..] ” are a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper), see 2106.04(a)(2)(I).
Limitations are considered together as a single abstract idea for further analysis. (discussing Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010))
Step 2A – Prong 2
Claims 18 does not include additional elements (when considered individually, as an ordered combination, and/or within the claim as a whole) that are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The 1st additional element is “receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;” to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g).
In view of the above the “additional element” individually or a combination does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. See, MPEP §§2106.05(a).
Step 2B
Claims18 does not include additional elements, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The reasons for reaching this conclusion are substantially the same as the reasons given above in § Step 2A – Prong 2. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(g) and MPEP §§2106.05(II).
Dependent Claims 19-31
Dependent claims 19-31 fail to cure this deficiency of independent claim 18 (set forth above) and are rejected accordingly. Particularly, claims 19-31 recite limitations that represent (in addition to the limitations already noted above) either the abstract idea or an additional element that is merely extra-solution activity, mere use of instructions and/or generic computer component(s) as a tool to implement the abstract idea, and/or merely limits the abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
For examples,
19. identifying the triggering event includes filtering the moisture information(a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
20. filtering the moisture information includes filtering the moisture information by a filter threshold a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
21. the filter threshold includes at least one of a threshold distance, a threshold rainfall, a threshold soil moisture, or a threshold location (to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g)).
22. the remote location includes a plurality of remote locations and receiving the moisture information includes receiving the moisture information for the plurality of remote locations (to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g)).
23. predicting the predicted soil moisture level includes generating a moisture model, the moisture model mapping the predicted soil moisture level to the triggering event(i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
24. the generating the moisture model includes correlating truth soil moisture levels at the first location based on a similar triggering event that is similar to the triggering event(i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
25. correlating the truth soil moisture levels includes correlating the truth soil moisture levels with the similar triggering event with a predetermined amount of time (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
26. the truth soil moisture levels are directly obtained from moisture sensors at the first property (to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g)).
27. generating the predicted soil moisture level includes preparing an estimated accuracy of the predicted soil moisture level(i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
28. preparing the estimated accuracy includes assigning weight coefficients to elements of the moisture model (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
29. adjusting the baseline watering schedule includes adjusting the baseline watering schedule when the estimated accuracy of the predicted soil moisture level is above an accuracy threshold (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment).
30. after a predetermined period of time after the triggering event, requesting truth soil moisture levels from moisture sensors at the first location(to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g)).
31. training a prediction model using the truth soil moisture levels and the triggering event(to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claims 32-36
Step 2A – Prong 1
Exemplary claim 32 is directed to an abstract idea of predicting soil moisture at a first location.
The abstract idea is set forth or described by the following italicized limitations:
A method for predicting soil moisture at a first location, the method comprising:
receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;
filtering the moisture information to identify a triggering event that results in a change in a soil moisture level at the first level;
applying a moisture model to the moisture information to generate a predicted moisture level at the first location a period of time after the triggering event; and
based on the predicted moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location..
The italicized limitations above represent a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment). Therefore, the italicized limitations fall within the subject matter groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in Section I of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
For example, the limitation “filtering the moisture information to identify a triggering event [..];[..] generate a predicted moisture level at the first location [..];[..]adjusting a baseline watering event[..] ” are a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper), see 2106.04(a)(2)(I).
Limitations are considered together as a single abstract idea for further analysis. (discussing Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010))
Step 2A – Prong 2
Claims 32 does not include additional elements (when considered individually, as an ordered combination, and/or within the claim as a whole) that are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The 1st additional element is “receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;” to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g).
In view of the above the “additional element” individually or a combination does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. See, MPEP §§2106.05(a).
Step 2B
Claim 32 does not include additional elements, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The reasons for reaching this conclusion are substantially the same as the reasons given above in § Step 2A – Prong 2. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(g) and MPEP §§2106.05(II).
Dependent Claims 33-36
Dependent claims 32-36 fail to cure this deficiency of independent claim 32 (set forth above) and are rejected accordingly. Particularly, claims 32-36 recite limitations that represent (in addition to the limitations already noted above) either the abstract idea or an additional element that is merely extra-solution activity, mere use of instructions and/or generic computer component(s) as a tool to implement the abstract idea, and/or merely limits the abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
For examples,
33. applying the moisture model includes applying a plurality of moisture models to the moisture information (a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper), see 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
34. generating a model accuracy for the moisture models(a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper), see 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
35. verifying the model accuracy with truth moisture levels at the first location(a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper), see 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
36. adjusting the moisture model based on the verified model accuracy(a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper), see 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
Regarding claim 37
Step 2A – Prong 1
Exemplary claim 37 is directed to an abstract idea of predicting soil moisture at a first location.
The abstract idea is set forth or described by the following italicized limitations:
An irrigation management system, comprising:
a processor and memory, the processor including instructions that cause the processor to:
receive moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;
identify, in the moisture information, a triggering event, the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location;
based on the triggering event, predict a predicted soil moisture level at the first location; and
based on the predicted soil moisture level, adjust a baseline watering event for the first location.
The italicized limitations above represent a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or a mental judgment). Therefore, the italicized limitations fall within the subject matter groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in Section I of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
For example, the limitation “identify, in the moisture information, a triggering event [..];[..]predict a predicted soil moisture level [..];[..]adjusting a baseline watering event[..] ” are a mental step (i.e., a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper), see 2106.04(a)(2)(I).
Limitations are considered together as a single abstract idea for further analysis. (discussing Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010))
Step 2A – Prong 2
Claims 37 does not include additional elements (when considered individually, as an ordered combination, and/or within the claim as a whole) that are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The 1st additional element is “receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location;” to be performed, at least in-part, by use of a memory and to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., field of use and/or data gathering) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. see MPEP §§ 2106.05(g).
The 2nd additional element is “An irrigation management system, comprising:
a processor and memory, the processor including instructions that cause the processor to”. This element amounts to mere use of a generic computer component and this element individually does not provide a practical application. In view of the above, the “additional element” individually do not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. (See MPEP 2106.05(h))
In view of the above four “additional elements” individually does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. Furthermore, the “additional elements” in combination amount to a generic device with software, where such computers, database and software amount to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer(s) and/or mere use of a generic computer component(s) as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Therefore, these elements in combination do not provide a practical application. The combination of additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, and for this additional reason, the combination of additional elements does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. See, MPEP §§2106.05(a).
.
Step 2B
Claim 37 does not include additional elements, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. For example, the elements, i.e. “processor and memory”, which are generic computer components, which is well understood, routine and convention (see background of current discloser and IDS) and MPEP 2106.05(d))The reasons for reaching this conclusion are substantially the same as the reasons given above in § Step 2A – Prong 2. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(g) and MPEP §§2106.05(II).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-29 and 32-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mase et al. (US 20180252694) in view of Poder et al. (US 2014/0266684).
Regarding Claims 18 and 37. Mase teaches a method (fig. 3-4) for predicting soil moisture at a first location, the method comprising(second Area: fig. 4):
An irrigation management system, comprising: a processor and memory, the processor including instructions that cause the processor to (as cited in claim 37)(506: fig.5)
receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location (S11: fig. 3; sensor(first area): fig. 4);
identifying, in the moisture information, a triggering event, wherein the triggering event including an event at the remote location that changes a soil moisture level at the first location(S15:fig. 3; amount of rainfall:[0065]-[0068]);
based on the triggering event, predicting a predicted soil moisture level at the first location(s18: fig. 3); and
Mase silent about based on the predicted soil moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location.
However, Poder teaches based on the predicted soil moisture level(901: fig.9), adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location(905: fig. 9; preferred watering schedules, water usage limitations (e.g., drought considerations, budget considerations, etc.): [0067], [0101]-[0104])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Mase, based on the predicted soil moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location, as taught by Poder, so as to maintain watering activity at the premises in a budget limit.
Regarding Claim 19. Mase further teaches identifying the triggering event includes filtering the moisture information(S15:fig. 3; amount of rainfall: [0065]-[0068]).
Regarding Claim 20. Mase further teaches filtering the moisture information includes filtering the moisture information by a filter threshold (S15:fig. 3; amount of rainfall: [0065]-[0068]).
Regarding Claim 21. Mase further teaches the filter threshold includes at least one of a threshold distance, a threshold rainfall, a threshold soil moisture, or a threshold location S15:fig. 3; amount of rainfall: [0065]-[0068]).
Regarding Claim 22. Mase further teaches the remote location includes a plurality of remote locations and receiving the moisture information includes receiving the moisture information for the plurality of remote locations (Second Areas: fig.4).
Regarding Claim 23. Mase further teaches predicting the predicted soil moisture level includes generating a moisture model, the moisture model mapping the predicted soil moisture level to the triggering event(ground surface moisture content (quantity having a correlation with the soil moisture content:[0065]-[0068]).
Regarding Claim 24. Mase further teaches n the generating the moisture model includes correlating truth soil moisture levels at the first location based on a similar triggering event that is similar to the triggering event(ground surface moisture content (quantity having a correlation with the soil moisture content:[0065]-[0068]).
Regarding Claim 25. Mase further teaches correlating the truth soil moisture levels includes correlating the truth soil moisture levels with the similar triggering event with a predetermined amount of time(ground surface moisture content (quantity having a correlation with the soil moisture content, rainfall using property parameters of all conceivable soil types:[0065]-[0068]).
Regarding Claim 26. Mase further teaches the truth soil moisture levels are directly obtained from moisture sensors at the first property(sensor: fig.4).
Regarding Claim 27. Mase further teaches generating the predicted soil moisture level includes preparing an estimated accuracy of the predicted soil moisture level(s15, s18: fig.3; [0065]-[0068] ).
Regarding Claim 28. Mase further teaches preparing the estimated accuracy includes assigning weight coefficients to elements of the moisture model (the system may display a mesh element in which moisture content in soil was directly measured in a heavily shaded manner, whereas display a mesh element in which moisture content in soil was estimated over a wide area in a slightly lighter manner. In addition, the system may distinguish display modes based on colors, instead of light and shade. Further, the system may combine the above-described display methods, for example, weight Fs for mesh elements in which moisture content was estimated across a wide area in such a way that Fs is more heavily weighted as the value of Fs is distanced from 1, and employ display modes according to levels of the values of Fs: [0095]).
Regarding Claim 29. Mase silent about adjusting the baseline watering schedule includes adjusting the baseline watering schedule when the estimated accuracy of the predicted soil moisture level is above an accuracy threshold.
However, Poder teaches adjusting the baseline watering schedule includes adjusting the baseline watering schedule when the estimated accuracy of the predicted soil moisture level is above an accuracy threshold ([0101]-[0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Mase, adjusting the baseline watering schedule includes adjusting the baseline watering schedule when the estimated accuracy of the predicted soil moisture level is above an accuracy threshold, as taught by Poder, so as to maintain watering activity at the premises in a budget limit.
Regarding Claim 32. Mase teaches a method (fig. 3-4) for predicting soil moisture at a first location, the method comprising(second Area: fig. 4):
receiving moisture information for a remote location remote from the first location(S11: fig. 3; sensor(first area): fig. 4);
filtering the moisture information to identify a triggering event that results in a change in a soil moisture level at the first level(S15:fig. 3; amount of rainfall:[0065]-[0068]);
applying a moisture model to the moisture information to generate a predicted moisture level at the first location a period of time after the triggering event(a time interval at which data on the amount of rainfall are observed: [0048]; s12, s14, s18: fig. 3; :[0065]-[0068]);
Mase silent about based on the predicted moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location.
However, Poder teaches based on the predicted moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location (905: fig. 9; preferred watering schedules, water usage limitations (e.g., drought considerations, budget considerations, etc.): [0067], [0103]-[0104])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Mase, based on the predicted moisture level, adjusting a baseline watering event for the first location, as taught by Poder, so as to maintain watering activity at the premises in a budget limit.
Regarding Claim 33. Mase further teaches applying the moisture model includes applying a plurality of moisture models to the moisture information (s12, s14, s18: fig. 3; [0065]-[0068]).
Regarding Claim 34. Mase further teaches generating a model accuracy for the moisture models(s13, s15: fig.3; [0065]-[0068] ).
Regarding Claims 35-36. Mase silent about verifying the model accuracy with truth moisture levels at the first location and adjusting the moisture model based on the verified model accuracy.
However, Poder teaches verifying the model accuracy with truth moisture levels at the first location (901: fig. 9) and adjusting the moisture model based on the verified model accuracy(905: fig. 9; [0101]-[0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Mase, verifying the model accuracy with truth moisture levels at the first location and adjusting the moisture model based on the verified model accuracy, as taught by Poder, so as to maintain watering activity at the premises in a budget limit.
Claim(s) 30-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mase et al. (US 20180252694) in view of Poder et al. (US 2014/0266684), further in view of Blanchard (US 2010/0147389)
Regarding Claim 30. The modified Mase silent about after a predetermined period of time after the triggering event, requesting truth soil moisture levels from moisture sensors at the first location.
However, Blanchard teaches after a predetermined period of time after the triggering event, requesting truth soil moisture levels from moisture sensors at the first location(the detected soil moisture data represented by the signal can be stored in the memory module 55. The sensor 65 can be configured to take a soil moisture reading according to a desired frequency. In one exemplary embodiment, the sensor 65 takes a soil moisture reading every five seconds to a minute during irrigation events or rain events, and every minute to five minutes when irrigation and rain events are not occurring: [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of modified Mase, v after a predetermined period of time after the triggering event, requesting truth soil moisture levels from moisture sensors at the first location, as taught by Blanchard, so as to dynamically controlled for eliminating over-watering.
Regarding Claim 31. Mase further teaches training a prediction model using the truth soil moisture levels and the triggering event(S13: fig. 3; [0064]-[0065]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Bou et al. (US 20210235641): the machine learning algorithm having been trained based on a training set comprising one or both of (a) the field data from the plurality of monitoring sensors, and (b) at least one generated feature derived from the field data; and determining, based on a threshold associated with the at least one variable, that the predicted value for the at least one variable indicates that an intervention in the at least one crop field is to be initiated; and in response to the determining, causing the at least one controllable device to vary the at least one production environment condition.
b) Jennings et al. (US20180129175): automatic irrigation for a micro-climate areas and subterranean soil modeling are provided herein. Some methods include receiving collection of micro-climate data having weather data from a weather station that is proximate a target area, canopy imaging for the target area, depth-specific soil data for the target area, plant health data that includes stomatal conductance and evapotranspiration for plants in the target area, and selectively adjusting operation of an irrigation system so as to increase or decrease water applied to the target area based on analysis of the micro-climate data.
c) Buss(2022/0248617): determine from representative data daily crop water usage being the total water volume in millimeters of moisture per 100 during a 24 hour period, the rate of soil moisture depletion during the plant moisture uptake period within each respective 24 hour period within the predetermined number of consecutive 24 hour periods adjusted for drainage, but only if there are more than two 24 hour periods of measurable daily crop water usage within the predetermined number of day consecutive 24 hour periods or there was no water in soil event on day d;
d) Eng (US20150223416): within the zone of the property any number of sensors (e.g., a soil-moisture sensor) that detects various environmental conditions such as soil-moisture content of soil within the zone of the property. The sprinkler controller may adjust the sprinkling schedule for the zone of the property in response to a combination of the watering restriction and the soil-moisture content of the soil within the zone of the property.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD K ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0328. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/MOHAMMAD K ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights