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 .
*Examiner Note: Claim language is bolded. Cited References are italicized. Examiner interpretations are preceded with an asterisk *.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/27/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 and 22-24 are currently pending and have been considered, as provided in more detail below. Claim 21 has been canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on January 21, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot because the amendments made have presented a combination of elements directed towards newly added elements that have necessitated new grounds of rejection.
Response to Amendment
Regarding the previous rejections, the amendments made to the claims fail to overcome the prior art and have necessitated new grounds of rejection as outlined below. While the new ground of rejection may rely on previous references applied in the prior rejection of record, a new additional reference has been added to the combination and introduced for Applicant’s consideration given the amended independent claim. The new grounds of rejection are outlined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4, 6-20 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsijns et al. (US 2017/0303505 A1) in view of O’Hare (US 2011/0298619 A1) and further in view of Van den Berg (US 2003/0154925 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Karsijns discloses A control arrangement (100) (Fig. 1, 8 and see at
least para. [0015] which discloses “The cleaning robot 16 is connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel“, *Examiner interprets the control unit 8 to be the control arrangement because it controls the operation of the mobile agricultural devices) configured to control operation of plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (Fig. 1, 16 and 14 and see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns which discloses “a dung robot which can move through the farm” and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “the system comprises a dung scraper 14 … The dung scraper 14 is communicatively connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel … the system comprises a cleaning robot 16 for cleaning the stable. The cleaning robot 16 is connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel” and see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”, *This dung scraper 14 and the cleaning robot 16 correspond to a plurality of mobile agricultural devices, as broadly as recited, because both are configured to move within the livestock environment and their operation is controlled by the control unit 8) in a livestock area (30) (Fig. 1, 3 and 32 and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “The farm system also comprises a meadow 32, the meadow 32 and the stable 3 being connected with each other”, *Examiner interprets the meadow 32 and the stable to be a livestock area), the control arrangement (100) (Fig. 1, 8 and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “The cleaning robot 16 is connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel“, *Examiner interprets the control unit 8 to correspond to the claimed control arrangement because it controls the operation of the mobile agricultural devices) configured: to communicate (see at least para. [0013] of Karsijns which discloses “The position of a smart tag can be determined in a manner known per se. The smart tag can communicate with the transmitter and receiver unit by means of, for instance, radio waves” and see at least para. [0015] which discloses “The system further comprises a control unit 8 which via a communication link (a), such as a line, is communicatively connected to the transmitter and receiver unit 6“, *Examiner interprets the control unit 8 to be configured to communicate because it is communicatively connected to the transmitter and receiver unit 6 and is configured to receive information communicated from the smart tags via the transmitter and receiver unit) with a location system (see at least para. [0013] which discloses “The farm system comprises a plurality of smart tags 2.i (i=1, 2, 3 . . . n). The system further comprises at least one transmitter and receiver unit 6 for wirelessly communicating with the smart tags 2.i. The smart tag 2.i can be of a type known per se which is configured for determining positions (location)”, *Examiner interprets the combination of smart tags configured to determine location and the transmitter and receiver unit configured to communicate with the smart tags to correspond to a location system, as broadly as recited, because the system determines positions of tagged objects based on wireless communication. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with Applicant’s specification, an RTLS includes tags and readers that determine position; Karsijns discloses tags that communicate with a transmitter/receiver and determine positions and therefore meets this limitation) arranged in the livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0013] which discloses “a smart tag 2.1 is attached to the neck of an animal 4.1”, *Examiner interprets that the smart tags and associated communication system are arranged in the livestock area because the tags are attached to animals located within the livestock area) to track positions (see at least para. [0013] of Karsijns which discloses “The smart tag 2.i can be of a type known per se which is configured for determining positions (location), orientation and/or movements of the animal“) of objects located in the livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “With the aid of the smart tag 2.1 and 2.3, information about the movements and positions of the animals 4.1 and 4.2 is obtained”, *Examiner interprets the animals (i.e., animals 4.1 and 4.2) to correspond to the claimed objects, and the determination and obtaining of position information via the smart tags to correspond to tracking positions of objects in the livestock area) and to automatically control (see at least para. [0002] of Karsijns which discloses “For such automation, typically, farm units are employed such as robots and/or other machines that perform their work automatically” and see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”) an operation of one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage … the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area”, *Karsijns discloses automatically controlling operation of mobile agricultural devices and Examiner interprets para. [0017] to correspond to automatic control because the control unit initiates operation of the device based on detected conditions without requiring manual input).
Karsijns discloses tracking positions of objects located in the livestock area, as discussed
above.
Karsijns may not explicitly disclose obtaining such positions in real-time; to obtain, from
the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and of each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) based on tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), the RTLS comprising readers (54) receiving wireless signals from the tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) to determine the respective real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20).
However, in the same field of endeavor, O’Hare discloses obtaining positions of objects
located in the livestock area in real-time (see at least para. [0004] of O’Hare which discloses “a real time location system (RTLS) for determining the three dimensional position of said at least one tag within a monitoring zone”); to obtain, from the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0047] of O’Hare which discloses “an orientation sensing/detection device within each tag 18 which allows the orientation as well of the position of each animal and/or object with respect to its environment to be determined”) and of each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0018] of O’Hare which discloses “a method of monitoring animals comprising individually identifying and tracking the movements of tagged animals and/or objects in three dimensions within a monitoring zone”, *Examiner interprets the other object to be the plural mobile agricultural devices) based on tags (51, 51') (Fig. 1, 18 and see at last para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone”) attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0059] of O’Hare which discloses “Mobile objects within the animal's environment may be associated with further tags so that the position and also preferably the orientation of such objects can be determined”), the RTLS comprising readers (54) (see at least para. [0081] of O’Hare which discloses “A portable tag reader may be provided for interrogating a tag of an animal to identify the animal and download information, for example logged information on the animal's activities or information from one or more biometric sensors associated with the animal. The reader may be provided with a tag to be identified by the system and/or may be provided with an orientation sensing device”) receiving wireless signals (see at least para. [0056] of O’Hare which discloses “Each tag may be provided with additional wireless, infra-red or other suitable communications means to enable communication between tags and/or suitable receivers/transceivers located within the monitoring zone“) from the tags (51, 51') (Fig. 1, 18 and see at last para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone”) attached to the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0073] of O’Hare which discloses “monitoring systems for providing a moving or still image of the animal's surroundings which may be transmitted from the animal's tag”) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone” and see at least para. [0053] of O’Hare which discloses “Each tag may also uniquely identify the individual animal or object to which it is attached”) to determine the respective real-time positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0079] of O’Hare which discloses “A tag may be associated with each moveable object within the monitoring zone such that an alarm or alert may be triggered based upon the proximity and/or orientation of an animal to such tagged objects”) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0059] of O’Hare which discloses “Mobile objects within the animal's environment may be associated with further tags so that the position and also preferably the orientation of such objects can be determined”, *Examiner interprets the animals and movable objects disclosed in O’Hare to correspond to the claimed individual animals and mobile agricultural devices, as broadly recited, and the TRLS of O’Hare to correspond to the claimed real-time location system because it determines real-time positions of tagged objects based on wireless communication within a monitoring zone corresponding to a livestock area).
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 control arrangement of Karsijns to include obtaining positions in real-time; to obtain, from the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and of each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) based on tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), the RTLS comprising readers (54) receiving wireless signals from the tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10)and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) to determine the respective real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20); as taught in O’Hare with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve system responsiveness, safety and operational efficiency within the livestock area. See para. [0037] of O’Hare for motivation.
Karsijns does disclose automatically controlling operation of a mobile agricultural device
(see para. [0017]), which discloses that the “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”), Examiner interprets this to correspond to automatic control because the control unit initiates operation of the device based on detected animal-related conditions without requiring manual input).
Karsijns may not explicitly disclose that such control is based on the obtained real-time
positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices.
However, Van den Berg discloses controlling operation of devices based on the
obtained positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (see at least para. [0010] of Van den Berg which discloses “the assembly is provided with an animal-position-determining device for determining the position of the animal relative to the retaining device and/or the feeding gate. The retaining device can in particular be activated partially with the aid of data from the animal-position-determining device, so that retaining of an animal that has not assumed a correct position can be prevented. In a further embodiment of an assembly according to the invention, the assembly is provided with an animal identification device for identifying an animal at a feeding station. Moreover, data from such an animal-position-determining device, in particular in combination with the animal identification device, can give an indication of the preference of an animal for a particular feeding station. Moreover, by these means or by other means that are appropriate for that purpose, the assembly can be suitable for determining the feeding station where an animal to be milked is present and for activating the relevant retaining device for retaining said animal at the determined feeding station”, *Examiner interprets this to correspond to controlling operation of devices, including mobile agricultural devices, based on positions of animals relative to devices and locations).
O’Hare discloses determining real time positions of animals and objects using an RTLS
and further discloses responding to positional relationships between such entities (i.e., triggering alerts based on proximity and/or orientation) – see at least para. [0010] of O’Hare which discloses “at least one further tag may be associated with a mobile device, such as a vehicle, such that the system may provide an alert, for example to the operator of the device, if the proximity and orientation between such further tag and a tag of an animal indicates a certain proximity between the object and animal” and see at least para. [0079] of O’Hare which discloses “A tag may be associated with each moveable object within the monitoring zone such that an alarm or alert may be triggered based upon the proximity and/or orientation of an animal to such tagged objects”, *Examiner interprets this to teach the use of positional information of animals and objects to influence system behavior.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to use the real time positional information provided by O’Hare with a reasonable expectation of success to control operation of the mobile agricultural devices of Karsijns, because using precise positional data instead of simple presence detection would predictability improve control accuracy, safety and coordination between animals and devices.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control of Karsijns, as modified by O’Hare so that it is based on the obtained real-time positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices; as taught in Van den Berg with a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate device operation to be controlled based on spatial relationships between animals and devices, thereby improving positioning accuracy, preventing improper engagement (i.e., activating devices when animals are not properly positioned), and enabling coordinated operation of mobile agricultural devices relative to animal locations within the livestock area. See para. [0010] of Van den Berg for motivation.
Regarding claim 2, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg disclose wherein the
control arrangement (100) is further configured: to operate one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) at a time and/or a place (see at least para. [0018] of Karsijns which discloses “Control of a farm unit may also in part be based on other information, for instance be based on the time of day. For instance, during the night, the control unit must not activate the dung robot. During the day, on the other hand, the control unit can activate the dung robot, on the basis of the animal status. Also the feeding machines 10.1-10.3 and the dosing system 11.2 can be operated by the control unit at least on the basis of information obtained with the aid of the smart tags“ and see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the distribution unit can be activated by the control unit when it is determined that bedding areas are not or insufficiently utilized (for instance: the lying time per animal is too short) and/or that no animals are present at any bedding place in the cow box. Such bedding place can then be automatically provided by means of the distribution unit with a layer of material, such as straw”) in the livestock area determined from the obtained positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “With the aid of the smart tag 2.1 and 2.3, information about the movements and positions of the animals 4.1 and 4.2 is obtained”) and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “with the smart tag, a position of the animal has been determined that corresponds to the position of one of the feeding machines 10.1-10.3 and/or the feeding gate and/or the automatic dosing system 11.2”, *Examiner interprets this to mean the position of the agricultural devices could also be obtained from the system since it determines the position of the animal and the animal and agricultural device positions correspond to each other).
Regarding claim 3, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg disclose
wherein the control arrangement is further configured: to determine, based on the obtained positions of the individual animals (10) and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), times when and/or places where one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) can operate safely and/or undisturbed in the livestock area (see at least para. [0017] of of Karsijns which discloses “the control unit is configured for automatically determining an animal status at least on the basis of information obtained by the smart tags about movements and/or positions of the animal, while thereupon, based on the determined animal status, at least one of the farm units is controlled. For instance, the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage 16. When the animals 4.1 and 4.2 are in the cow box 30, and this is determined by the control unit 8 with the aid of the smart tags 2.1 and 2.3, the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area 32 of the stable 3 which is outside the cow box 30. Also, the distribution unit can be activated by the control unit when it is determined that bedding areas are not or insufficiently utilized (for instance: the lying time per animal is too short) and/or that no animals are present at any bedding place in the cow box”, *Examiner interprets this to mean the determination is made based on positions of the animals and the agricultural devices, times when and/or places where the devices can operate safely, and to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in accordance with the determined times and/or places (see at least para. [0020] of Karsijns which discloses “the animal status was determined by the control unit based on information received from a smart tag. It is also possible, however, that the smart tag is an ‘intelligent’ smart tag and, if so, itself determines on the basis of detected movements of the animal an animal status such as feeding, lying, standing and activity or an animal status such as ‘has fed’. The smart tag can supply this information, for instance in combination with a time label indicating the time and/or period of time to which the respective information relates, via the transmitter and receiver unit 6 to the control unit 8. The control unit 8 can then process this information for controlling the farm units”).
Regarding claim 4, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein the
control arrangement (100) is further configured: to select a mobile agricultural device of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) for performing a task based on the obtained positions of the individual animals (10) and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns discloses “Selecting a farm unit therefore means that the farm system comprises a set of farm units comprising at least two, in particular at least three, farm units at least one of which can be selected to be controlled by the control unit” and see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns which discloses “on the basis of information which has been received from at least one smart tag, selecting at least one farm unit for control by the control unit, more particularly, selecting an activity that needs to be carried out and accordingly controlling a farm unit for carrying out the selected activity”).
Regarding claim 6, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg discloses wherein the
control arrangement is further configured: to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) based on one or more relative distances between the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) and the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0013] of Karsijns which discloses ”a distance from the smart tag to the transmitter and receiver unit can be calculated”, *Examiner interprets this distance to be the distance between agricultural device and animal since the animal is wearing the smart tag).
Regarding claim 7, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein the
control arrangement is further configured: to store the obtained positions (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “With the aid of the smart tag 2.1 and 2.3, information about the movements and positions of the animals 4.1 and 4.2 is obtained”) of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “When the animals 4.1 and 4.2 are in the cow box 30, and this is determined by the control unit 8 with the aid of the smart tags 2.1 and 2.3, the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area 32 of the stable 3 which is outside the cow box 30”, *Examiner interprets an operation of the mobile agricultural devices 16 will be controlled based on the positions of the individual animals 4.1/4.2) and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in a data storage, and to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) based on historical positions of the individual animals (10) and/or the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0020] of Karsijns which discloses “The smart tag can supply this information, for instance in combination with a time label indicating the time and/or period of time to which the respective information relates, via the transmitter and receiver unit 6 to the control unit 8. The control unit 8 can then process this information for controlling the farm units”, *Examiner interprets the receiver unit 6 to be the data storage because information from the smart tag can be stored in unit 6 and then transmitted for controlling the agricultural device and see para. [0024] which discloses “The system may also be so configured as to, in use, supply the alert to a device of the user, such as a computer, a tablet or mobile phone” *Examiner interprets computer to have data storage).
Regarding claim 8, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein the
control arrangement (100) is further configured: to determine a schedule or speed for operating the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) based on the obtained positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns which discloses “a cooling unit or a ventilation unit and the like can be operated for cooling a space where an animal concerned is present”, *Examiner interprets that since these limitations are cited in the alternative, only 1 limitation is required, i.e., schedule and in this case, the schedule is anytime an animal is present) and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), and to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) based on the determined schedule and/or speed (see at least para. [0021] of Karsijns which discloses “depending on a combination of a status of an animal and another measurement carried out by a smart tag, such as a temperature measurement or a light measurement, the control unit can select a particular farm unit for carrying out a particular operation. It also holds that, depending on a determined animal status, just one particular farm unit can be selected”).
Regarding claim 9, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein the
control arrangement is further configured: to calculate zones and/or paths (see at least para. [0017] which discloses “Then, the cleaning robot 16 can proceed to clean the stable via defined routes”) for operating the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “the system comprises at least one feeding gate/feeding path 11.1 where an automatic dosing system 11.2 can dose out feed. The system furthermore comprises four milking robots 12.1-12.4 which are ach connected with the control unit via a communication channel (c)” Examiner interprets that since these limitations are cited in the alternative, only 1 limitation is required, i.e., an identified path) based on the obtained positions of the individual animals (10) and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), and to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) based on the calculated zones and/or paths (see at least para. [0017] which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage 16. When the animals 4.1 and 4.2 are in the cow box 30, and this is determined by the control unit 8 with the aid of the smart tags 2.1 and 2.3, the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area 32 of the stable 3 which is outside the cow box 30” and see at least para. [0019] which discloses “the animal can move via a passage 36 to the feeding machines 10.1-10.3. When the animal presents at one of the feeding machines, the presence of the animal is recognized by means of the smart tag and this is passed on to the control unit 8. Then the control unit 8 controls the respective feeding machine, for instance the feeding machine 10.1, to feed a predetermined amount of portion feed to the animal“ and “ Then, the cleaning robot 16 can proceed to clean the stable via defined routes”, *Examiner interprets this to be the control of the operation of the devices based on the calculated/identified route/path).
Regarding claim 10, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein the
calculated zones comprise temporarily unallowed zones where at least one of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) are temporarily unallowed to drive (see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “When the animals are behind the feeding fence 34, the control unit 8 will control the dung robot 16 such that it will not go near the feeding fence 34, in order to avoid unrest among the animals”, *Examiner interprets the fact that the robot will not go near the feeding fence to be the robot is temporarily unallowed to drive in that area).
Regarding claim 11, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein
the control arrangement is further configured: to obtain information indicating whether passages (Fig. 1, 16 of Karsijns) in the livestock area are free or blocked, and to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) based on whether the passages are free or blocked (see at least para. [0017] which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage 16. When the animals 4.1 and 4.2 are in the cow box 30, and this is determined by the control unit 8 with the aid of the smart tags 2.1 and 2.3, the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area 32 of the stable 3 which is outside the cow box 30”, *Examiner interprets, that when the animals are in the cow box 30 then the passage 16 will be free).
Regarding claim 12, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein
the control arrangement is further configured: to assign tasks to humans, and to provide information about assigned tasks via a user interface (see at least para. [0024] which discloses “It is also possible that the control unit, instead of or in addition to controlling a farm system, generates a report signal to indicate to a user that an activity is to be carried out, possibly together with information about what activity is to be carried out. The report signal may hence comprise just an alert for the user that something needs to be done but also information about the activity to be carried out. If the report signal is just an alert, a user can see, for instance on a display communicatively coupled to the control unit, what kind of activities are to be carried out. The system may be configured for, in response to the alert, generating a signal which can be directly perceived by a user, such as a light or audio signal. These latter signals can be just alerts and/or also comprise information for the user about the nature of the activities to be carried out“).
Regarding claim 13, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein
the control arrangement is further configured: to obtain, from the RTLS (50) (see at least para. [0004] of O’Hare which disclose “a real time location system (RTLS) for determining the three dimensional position”, *Examiner interprets, the RTLS will obtain the position of the mobile agricultural devices located in the livestock area), positions of individual humans (40) in the livestock area, and to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) based on the obtained positions of the individual humans (40) (see at least para. [0024] of Karsijns which discloses “The indicated activity to which the report signal relates can then comprise, for instance, the user having to put up a wire and/or install a fence or close off a passage so that a part of the meadow is no longer accessible to these animals. The effect is that this part of the meadow is not partly grazed by the animals. The animals then first have to graze the part of the meadow they are in, but where they are no longer grazing because, apparently, they have fed sufficiently”, *Examiner interprets the position of the user near the passage to be closed off as the obtained position of the individual human).
Regarding claim 14, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein
the control arrangement is further configured: to obtain, from the RTLS (50) ((see at least para. [0004] of O’Hare which disclose “a real time location system (RTLS) for determining the three dimensional position”, *Examiner interprets, the RTLS will obtain the position of the mobile agricultural devices located in the livestock area), positions of individual humans (40) (see at least para. [0024] of Karsijns which discloses “The indicated activity to which the report signal relates can then comprise, for instance, the user having to put up a wire and/or install a fence or close off a passage so that a part of the meadow is no longer accessible to these animals. The effect is that this part of the meadow is not partly grazed by the animals. The animals then first have to graze the part of the meadow they are in, but where they are no longer grazing because, apparently, they have fed sufficiently”, *Examiner interprets the position of the user near the passage to be closed off as the obtained position of the individual human) in the livestock area; to obtain information about tasks performed by the individual humans (40), and to evaluate execution of the tasks based on the obtained positions of the individual humans (see at least para. [0024] Karsijns which discloses “It is hence possible that the user, in response to the report signal, closes off a part of a meadow for animals and/or that the user, in response to the report signal, opens up a part of the meadow for the animals”, *Examiner interprets that once the location is determined, the u ser will perform tasks an execution of taskset will be evaluated).
Regarding claim 15, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein
the control arrangement is further configured: to obtain information about tasks performed by the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), and to evaluate execution of the tasks based on the obtained positions of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0021] of Karsijns which discloses “the control unit is configured for processing in combination information received from a plurality of smart tags and for controlling at least on the basis of the information processed in combination at least one farm unit. When, for instance, a large number of animals present themselves at the gate 22.3, which indicates that the animals may be restless and want to graze in the meadow, this can be established by the control unit whereupon the control unit controls the gate via the information channel (h) and opens it. Also when it appears that a large number of animals move vehemently, this can be thus established by the control unit 8. Then, the control unit can, for instance, activate the lighting units 18.1 and 18.2 when it is dark, so that the animals quiet down and it can be checked what is the matter with the animals” and see para. [0024[ of Karsijns which discloses “it has been explained that the control unit is configured for processing the received information and, at least on the basis of this processed information, controlling at least one of the farm units”).
Regarding claim 16, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein
the control arrangement is further configured: to obtain information about expected movement of the individual humans (40) while performing the tasks, and to evaluate the tasks by comparing (see at least para. [0022] of Karsijns which discloses “By comparing animal behavior with an optimum standard, deviations can be brought to light. In this manner, a dairy farmer can be shown that the dry cows are not fed properly”, *Examiner interprets this comparison will happen when the farmer/human is in an expected position about the stall or meadow) the obtained positions of the individual humans with the expected movement (see at least para. [0021] of Karsijns which discloses “The control unit is also configured for comparing at least one determined status that has been determined by the control unit or by the smart tag itself, of at least one animal, with a reference status for assessing animal management relating to the animal“).
Regarding claim 17, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses wherein
the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) include any selected from the group consisting of: agricultural robots, wagons, and feeders (Fig. 1, 12.1-12.4; 10.1-10.3 and 16 of Karsijns and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “four milking robots 12.1-12.4 …the system comprises a cleaning robot 16 for cleaning the stable … “the feeding units 10.1-10.3“, *Examiner interprets all of these devices to be plural mobile agricultural devices).
Regarding claim 18, Karsijns discloses A method, for controlling (Fig. 1, 8 and see at
least para. [0015] which discloses “The cleaning robot 16 is connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel“, *Examiner interprets the control unit 8 to be the control arrangement because it controls the operation of the mobile agricultural devices) plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (Fig. 1, 16 and 14 and see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns which discloses “a dung robot which can move through the farm” and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “the system comprises a dung scraper 14 … The dung scraper 14 is communicatively connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel … the system comprises a cleaning robot 16 for cleaning the stable. The cleaning robot 16 is connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel” and see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”, *This dung scraper 14 and the cleaning robot 16 correspond to a plurality of mobile agricultural devices, as broadly as recited, because both are configured to move within the livestock environment and their operation is controlled by the control unit 8) in a livestock area (Fig. 1, 3 and 32 and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “The farm system also comprises a meadow 32, the meadow 32 and the stable 3 being connected with each other”, *Examiner interprets the meadow 32 and the stable to be a livestock area) with a location system (see at least para. [0013] which discloses “The farm system comprises a plurality of smart tags 2.i (i=1, 2, 3 . . . n). The system further comprises at least one transmitter and receiver unit 6 for wirelessly communicating with the smart tags 2.i. The smart tag 2.i can be of a type known per se which is configured for determining positions (location)”, *Examiner interprets the combination of smart tags configured to determine location and the transmitter and receiver unit configured to communicate with the smart tags to correspond to a location system, as broadly as recited, because the system determines positions of tagged objects based on wireless communication. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with Applicant’s specification, an RTLS includes tags and readers that determine position; Karsijns discloses tags that communicate with a transmitter/receiver and determine positions and therefore meets this limitation) arranged therein (see at least para. [0013] which discloses “a smart tag 2.1 is attached to the neck of an animal 4.1”, *Examiner interprets that the smart tags and associated communication system are arranged in the livestock area because the tags are attached to animals located within the livestock area) that tracks positions (see at least para. [0013] of Karsijns which discloses “The smart tag 2.i can be of a type known per se which is configured for determining positions (location), orientation and/or movements of the animal“) of objects located in the livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “With the aid of the smart tag 2.1 and 2.3, information about the movements and positions of the animals 4.1 and 4.2 is obtained”, *Examiner interprets the animals (i.e., animals 4.1 and 4.2) to correspond to the claimed objects, and the determination and obtaining of position information via the smart tags to correspond to tracking positions of objects in the livestock area) and automatically controlling (S4) (see at least para. [0002] of Karsijns which discloses “For such automation, typically, farm units are employed such as robots and/or other machines that perform their work automatically” and see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”) an operation of one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage … the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area”, *Karsijns discloses automatically controlling operation of mobile agricultural devices and Examiner interprets para. [0017] to correspond to automatic control because the control unit initiates operation of the device based on detected conditions without requiring manual input)
Karsijns discloses tracking positions of objects located in the livestock area, as discussed
above.
Karsijns may not explicitly disclose in real-time, the method comprising: obtaining (S1),
from the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and of each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) using tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), the RTLS comprising readers (54) receiving wireless signals from the tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the mobile agricultural devices (20) to determine the respective real-time position of the individual animals (10) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20).
However, in the same field of endeavor, O’Hare discloses obtaining positions of objects
located in the livestock area in real-time (see at least para. [0004] of O’Hare which discloses “a real time location system (RTLS) for determining the three dimensional position of said at least one tag within a monitoring zone”); the method comprising: obtaining (S1), from the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0047] of O’Hare which discloses “an orientation sensing/detection device within each tag 18 which allows the orientation as well of the position of each animal and/or object with respect to its environment to be determined”) and of each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0018] of O’Hare which discloses “a method of monitoring animals comprising individually identifying and tracking the movements of tagged animals and/or objects in three dimensions within a monitoring zone”, *Examiner interprets the other object to be the plural mobile agricultural devices) using tags (51, 51') (Fig. 1, 18 and see at last para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone”) attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0059] of O’Hare which discloses “Mobile objects within the animal's environment may be associated with further tags so that the position and also preferably the orientation of such objects can be determined”), the RTLS comprising readers (54) (see at least para. [0081] of O’Hare which discloses “A portable tag reader may be provided for interrogating a tag of an animal to identify the animal and download information, for example logged information on the animal's activities or information from one or more biometric sensors associated with the animal. The reader may be provided with a tag to be identified by the system and/or may be provided with an orientation sensing device”) receiving wireless signals (see at least para. [0056] of O’Hare which discloses “Each tag may be provided with additional wireless, infra-red or other suitable communications means to enable communication between tags and/or suitable receivers/transceivers located within the monitoring zone“) from the tags (51, 51') (Fig. 1, 18 and see at last para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone”) attached to the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0073] of O’Hare which discloses “monitoring systems for providing a moving or still image of the animal's surroundings which may be transmitted from the animal's tag”) and attached to each one of the mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone” and see at least para. [0053] of O’Hare which discloses “Each tag may also uniquely identify the individual animal or object to which it is attached”) to determine the respective real-time position of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0079] of O’Hare which discloses “A tag may be associated with each moveable object within the monitoring zone such that an alarm or alert may be triggered based upon the proximity and/or orientation of an animal to such tagged objects”) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0059] of O’Hare which discloses “Mobile objects within the animal's environment may be associated with further tags so that the position and also preferably the orientation of such objects can be determined”, *Examiner interprets the animals and movable objects disclosed in O’Hare to correspond to the claimed individual animals and mobile agricultural devices, as broadly recited, and the TRLS of O’Hare to correspond to the claimed real-time location system because it determines real-time positions of tagged objects based on wireless communication within a monitoring zone corresponding to a livestock area).
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 control arrangement of Karsijns to include obtaining positions in real-time, the method comprising: obtaining (S1), from the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and of each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) using tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), the RTLS comprising readers (54) receiving wireless signals from the tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the mobile agricultural devices (20) to determine the respective real-time position of the individual animals (10) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20); as taught in O’Hare with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve system responsiveness, safety and operational efficiency within the livestock area. See para. [0037] of O’Hare for motivation.
Karsijns does disclose automatically controlling operation of a mobile agricultural device
(see para. [0017]), which discloses that the “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”), Examiner interprets this to correspond to automatic control because the control unit initiates operation of the device based on detected animal-related conditions without requiring manual input).
Karsijns may not explicitly disclose that such control is based on the obtained real-time
positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices.
However, Van den Berg discloses controlling operation of devices based on the
obtained positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (see at least para. [0010] of Van den Berg which discloses “the assembly is provided with an animal-position-determining device for determining the position of the animal relative to the retaining device and/or the feeding gate. The retaining device can in particular be activated partially with the aid of data from the animal-position-determining device, so that retaining of an animal that has not assumed a correct position can be prevented. In a further embodiment of an assembly according to the invention, the assembly is provided with an animal identification device for identifying an animal at a feeding station. Moreover, data from such an animal-position-determining device, in particular in combination with the animal identification device, can give an indication of the preference of an animal for a particular feeding station. Moreover, by these means or by other means that are appropriate for that purpose, the assembly can be suitable for determining the feeding station where an animal to be milked is present and for activating the relevant retaining device for retaining said animal at the determined feeding station”, *Examiner interprets this to correspond to controlling operation of devices, including mobile agricultural devices, based on positions of animals relative to devices and locations).
O’Hare discloses determining real time positions of animals and objects using an RTLS
and further discloses responding to positional relationships between such entities (i.e., triggering alerts based on proximity and/or orientation) – see at least para. [0010] of O’Hare which discloses “at least one further tag may be associated with a mobile device, such as a vehicle, such that the system may provide an alert, for example to the operator of the device, if the proximity and orientation between such further tag and a tag of an animal indicates a certain proximity between the object and animal” and see at least para. [0079] of O’Hare which discloses “A tag may be associated with each moveable object within the monitoring zone such that an alarm or alert may be triggered based upon the proximity and/or orientation of an animal to such tagged objects”, *Examiner interprets this to teach the use of positional information of animals and objects to influence system behavior.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to use the real time positional information provided by O’Hare with a reasonable expectation of success to control operation of the mobile agricultural devices of Karsijns, because using precise positional data instead of simple presence detection would predictability improve control accuracy, safety and coordination between animals and devices.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control of Karsijns, as modified by O’Hare so that it is based on the obtained real-time positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices; as taught in Van den Berg with a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate device operation to be controlled based on spatial relationships between animals and devices, thereby improving positioning accuracy, preventing improper engagement (i.e., activating devices when animals are not properly positioned), and enabling coordinated operation of mobile agricultural devices relative to animal locations within the livestock area. See para. [0010] of Van den Berg for motivation.
Regarding claim 19, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses further
comprising: storing (S1) the obtained positions of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which describes “the position of one of the feeding machines 10.1-10.3 and/or the feeding gate and/or the automatic dosing system 11.2”, *Examine interprets this position of the feeding machine to be stored) in a data storage (see at least para. [0020] of Karsijns which discloses “The smart tag can supply this information, for instance in combination with a time label indicating the time and/or period of time to which the respective information relates, via the transmitter and receiver unit 6 to the control unit 8. The control unit 8 can then process this information for controlling the farm units”, *Examiner interprets the receiver unit 6 to be the data storage because information from the smart tag can be stored in unit 6 and then transmitted for controlling the agricultural device and see para. [0024] which discloses “The system may also be so configured as to, in use, supply the alert to a device of the user, such as a computer, a tablet or mobile phone” *Examiner interprets computer to have data storage).
Regarding claim 20, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses further
comprising: selecting (S3) one or more agricultural devices (20) for performing a task (see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns discloses “Selecting a farm unit therefore means that the farm system comprises a set of farm units comprising at least two, in particular at least three, farm units at least one of which can be selected to be controlled by the control unit” and see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns which discloses “on the basis of information which has been received from at least one smart tag, selecting at least one farm unit for control by the control unit, more particularly, selecting an activity that needs to be carried out and accordingly controlling a farm unit for carrying out the selected activity”) based on the obtained positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “When the animals 4.1 and 4.2 are in the cow box 30, and this is determined by the control unit 8 with the aid of the smart tags 2.1 and 2.3, the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area 32 of the stable 3 which is outside the cow box 30”, *Examiner interprets an operation of the mobile agricultural devices 16 will be controlled based on the positions of the individual animals 4.1/4.2) and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0018] which discloses “on the basis of processed information that is obtained from a smart tag, a farm unit is controlled. This information can for instance relate to the position of the animal. The position of the animal then determines, for instance, where the dung robot can move to. … Then, in a second step, on the basis of a determined animal status, at least one of the farm units can be controlled”, *Examiner interprets this to be the automatic control of the agricultural devices based on positions of the animals and the agricultural devices because determining where the dung robot can move to will be based on its current position and the position of the animal).
Regarding claim 23, Karsijns discloses A livestock management system (see at least
para. [0010] of Karsijns which discloses “on the basis of information which is obtained by the control unit from at least one smart tag, to provide management information. A dairy farmer's animal management is of great influence on the technical results he can achieve. With good technical results, a farmer achieves a better financial return. In current practice, especially direct parameters are measured that reflect the technical results of the business. These are, for instance, the milk yield of the animals and the concentrate dosages. With the aid of information about animal behavior measured with the smart tag, it is possible, for instance, to indicate that and/or how the animal management of a (dairy) farmer can be improved. Improving management results in better technical results. By determining a behavior of an animal or of a group of animals with the aid of the smart tags, and with the aid of the control unit, management information can be obtained” and see at least para. [0013] of Karsijns which discloses “a farm system according to the invention is denoted. The farm system comprises a plurality of smart tags“, *These systems correspond to a livestock management system), comprising: a location system (see at least para. [0013] which discloses “The farm system comprises a plurality of smart tags 2.i (i=1, 2, 3 . . . n). The system further comprises at least one transmitter and receiver unit 6 for wirelessly communicating with the smart tags 2.i. The smart tag 2.i can be of a type known per se which is configured for determining positions (location)”, *Examiner interprets the combination of smart tags configured to determine location and the transmitter and receiver unit configured to communicate with the smart tags to correspond to a location system, as broadly as recited, because the system determines positions of tagged objects based on wireless communication. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with Applicant’s specification, an RTLS includes tags and readers that determine position; Karsijns discloses tags that communicate with a transmitter/receiver and determine positions and therefore meets this limitation) configured to be arranged in a livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0013] which discloses “a smart tag 2.1 is attached to the neck of an animal 4.1”, *Examiner interprets that the smart tags and associated communication system are arranged in the livestock area because the tags are attached to animals located within the livestock area and see Fig. 1, 3 and 32 and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “The farm system also comprises a meadow 32, the meadow 32 and the stable 3 being connected with each other”, *Examiner interprets the meadow 32 and the stable to be a livestock area) and configured to track positions (see at least para. [0013] of Karsijns which discloses “The smart tag 2.i can be of a type known per se which is configured for determining positions (location), orientation and/or movements of the animal“) of objects located in the livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “With the aid of the smart tag 2.1 and 2.3, information about the movements and positions of the animals 4.1 and 4.2 is obtained”, *Examiner interprets the animals (i.e., animals 4.1 and 4.2) to correspond to the claimed objects, and the determination and obtaining of position information via the smart tags to correspond to tracking positions of objects in the livestock area) and a control arrangement (Fig. 1, 8 and see at least para. [0015] which discloses “The cleaning robot 16 is connected with the control unit 8 via a communication channel“, *Examiner interprets the control unit 8 to be the control arrangement because it controls the operation of the mobile agricultural devices) configured: to communicate (see at least para. [0013] of Karsijns which discloses “The position of a smart tag can be determined in a manner known per se. The smart tag can communicate with the transmitter and receiver unit by means of, for instance, radio waves” and see at least para. [0015] which discloses “The system further comprises a control unit 8 which via a communication link (a), such as a line, is communicatively connected to the transmitter and receiver unit 6“, *Examiner interprets the control unit 8 to be configured to communicate because it is communicatively connected to the transmitter and receiver unit 6 and is configured to receive information communicated from the smart tags via the transmitter and receiver unit) with the location system (see at least para. [0013] which discloses “The farm system comprises a plurality of smart tags 2.i (i=1, 2, 3 . . . n). The system further comprises at least one transmitter and receiver unit 6 for wirelessly communicating with the smart tags 2.i. The smart tag 2.i can be of a type known per se which is configured for determining positions (location)”, *Examiner interprets the combination of smart tags configured to determine location and the transmitter and receiver unit configured to communicate with the smart tags to correspond to a location system, as broadly as recited, because the system determines positions of tagged objects based on wireless communication. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with Applicant’s specification, an RTLS includes tags and readers that determine position; Karsijns discloses tags that communicate with a transmitter/receiver and determine positions and therefore meets this limitation), and to automatically control (see at least para. [0002] of Karsijns which discloses “For such automation, typically, farm units are employed such as robots and/or other machines that perform their work automatically” and see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”) an operation of one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage … the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area”, *Karsijns discloses automatically controlling operation of mobile agricultural devices and Examiner interprets para. [0017] to correspond to automatic control because the control unit initiates operation of the device based on detected conditions without requiring manual input).
Karsijns discloses tracking positions of objects located in the livestock area, as discussed
above.
Karsijns may not explicitly disclose in real-time; and obtain, from the RTLS (50), real-
time positions of the individual animals (10) and of each one of plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) based on tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), the RTLS comprising readers (54) receiving wireless signals from the tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) to determine the respective real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20).
However, in the same field of endeavor, O’Hare discloses obtaining positions of objects
located in the livestock area in real-time (see at least para. [0004] of O’Hare which discloses “a real time location system (RTLS) for determining the three dimensional position of said at least one tag within a monitoring zone”); and obtain, from the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0047] of O’Hare which discloses “an orientation sensing/detection device within each tag 18 which allows the orientation as well of the position of each animal and/or object with respect to its environment to be determined”) and of each one of plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) (see at least para. [0018] of O’Hare which discloses “a method of monitoring animals comprising individually identifying and tracking the movements of tagged animals and/or objects in three dimensions within a monitoring zone”, *Examiner interprets the other object to be the plural mobile agricultural devices) based on tags (51, 51') (Fig. 1, 18 and see at last para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone”) attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0059] of O’Hare which discloses “Mobile objects within the animal's environment may be associated with further tags so that the position and also preferably the orientation of such objects can be determined”), the RTLS comprising readers (54) (see at least para. [0081] of O’Hare which discloses “A portable tag reader may be provided for interrogating a tag of an animal to identify the animal and download information, for example logged information on the animal's activities or information from one or more biometric sensors associated with the animal. The reader may be provided with a tag to be identified by the system and/or may be provided with an orientation sensing device”) receiving wireless signals (see at least para. [0056] of O’Hare which discloses “Each tag may be provided with additional wireless, infra-red or other suitable communications means to enable communication between tags and/or suitable receivers/transceivers located within the monitoring zone“) from the tags (51, 51') (Fig. 1, 18 and see at last para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone”) attached to the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0073] of O’Hare which discloses “monitoring systems for providing a moving or still image of the animal's surroundings which may be transmitted from the animal's tag”) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0044] of O’Hare which discloses “a tag 18 applied to each animal and also possibly to other objects, particularly moveable objects, within a monitoring zone” and see at least para. [0053] of O’Hare which discloses “Each tag may also uniquely identify the individual animal or object to which it is attached”) to determine the respective real-time positions of the individual animals (10) (see at least para. [0079] of O’Hare which discloses “A tag may be associated with each moveable object within the monitoring zone such that an alarm or alert may be triggered based upon the proximity and/or orientation of an animal to such tagged objects”) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0059] of O’Hare which discloses “Mobile objects within the animal's environment may be associated with further tags so that the position and also preferably the orientation of such objects can be determined”, *Examiner interprets the animals and movable objects disclosed in O’Hare to correspond to the claimed individual animals and mobile agricultural devices, as broadly recited, and the TRLS of O’Hare to correspond to the claimed real-time location system because it determines real-time positions of tagged objects based on wireless communication within a monitoring zone corresponding to a livestock area).
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 control arrangement of Karsijns to include obtaining positions in real-time; and obtain, from the RTLS (50), real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and of each one of plural mobile agricultural devices (20) in the livestock area (30) based on tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20), the RTLS comprising readers (54) receiving wireless signals from the tags (51, 51') attached to the individual animals (10) and attached to each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) to determine the respective real-time positions of the individual animals (10) and each one of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20); as taught in O’Hare with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve system responsiveness, safety and operational efficiency within the livestock area. See para. [0037] of O’Hare for motivation.
Karsijns does disclose automatically controlling operation of a mobile agricultural device
(see para. [0017]), which discloses that the “the dung scraper 14 can be activated when the control unit measures that no animals are present in the passage”), Examiner interprets this to correspond to automatic control because the control unit initiates operation of the device based on detected animal-related conditions without requiring manual input).
Karsijns may not explicitly disclose that such control is based on the obtained real-time
positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices.
However, Van den Berg discloses controlling operation of devices based on the
obtained positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (see at least para. [0010] of Van den Berg which discloses “the assembly is provided with an animal-position-determining device for determining the position of the animal relative to the retaining device and/or the feeding gate. The retaining device can in particular be activated partially with the aid of data from the animal-position-determining device, so that retaining of an animal that has not assumed a correct position can be prevented. In a further embodiment of an assembly according to the invention, the assembly is provided with an animal identification device for identifying an animal at a feeding station. Moreover, data from such an animal-position-determining device, in particular in combination with the animal identification device, can give an indication of the preference of an animal for a particular feeding station. Moreover, by these means or by other means that are appropriate for that purpose, the assembly can be suitable for determining the feeding station where an animal to be milked is present and for activating the relevant retaining device for retaining said animal at the determined feeding station”, *Examiner interprets this to correspond to controlling operation of devices, including mobile agricultural devices, based on positions of animals relative to devices and locations).
O’Hare discloses determining real time positions of animals and objects using an RTLS
and further discloses responding to positional relationships between such entities (i.e., triggering alerts based on proximity and/or orientation) – see at least para. [0010] of O’Hare which discloses “at least one further tag may be associated with a mobile device, such as a vehicle, such that the system may provide an alert, for example to the operator of the device, if the proximity and orientation between such further tag and a tag of an animal indicates a certain proximity between the object and animal” and see at least para. [0079] of O’Hare which discloses “A tag may be associated with each moveable object within the monitoring zone such that an alarm or alert may be triggered based upon the proximity and/or orientation of an animal to such tagged objects”, *Examiner interprets this to teach the use of positional information of animals and objects to influence system behavior.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to use the real time positional information provided by O’Hare with a reasonable expectation of success to control operation of the mobile agricultural devices of Karsijns, because using precise positional data instead of simple presence detection would predictability improve control accuracy, safety and coordination between animals and devices.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control of Karsijns, as modified by O’Hare so that it is based on the obtained real-time positions of the individual animals and of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices; as taught in Van den Berg with a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate device operation to be controlled based on spatial relationships between animals and devices, thereby improving positioning accuracy, preventing improper engagement (i.e., activating devices when animals are not properly positioned), and enabling coordinated operation of mobile agricultural devices relative to animal locations within the livestock area. See para. [0010] of Van den Berg for motivation.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Karsijns in view of O’Hare and Van den Berg
discloses wherein the control arrangement is further configured: to obtain information about expected movement of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) while performing the tasks (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “The status of the animal having fed can also be determined, for instance based on the fact that with the smart tag, a position of the animal has been determined that corresponds to the position of one of the feeding machines 10.1-10.3 and/or the feeding gate and/or the automatic dosing system 11.2. When in addition, by the orientation unit, an orientation and movements of the smart tag have been measured corresponding to an expected orientation and movements when feeding, it can be determined by the control unit that the animal is feeding and thus, a while later, that the animal has fed”), and to evaluate the tasks by comparing (see at least para. [0022] of Karsijns which discloses “By comparing animal behavior with an optimum standard, deviations can be brought to light. In this manner, a dairy farmer can be shown that the dry cows are not fed properly”, *Examiner interprets this comparison will happen when the farmer/human is in an expected position about the stall or meadow) the obtained positions of each of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) with the expected movement.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsijns et al. (US 2017/0303505 A1) in view of O’Hare (US 2011/0298619 A1) and further in view of Van den Berg (US 2003/0154925 A1) and further in view of Fujiyama (US 2020/0214266 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, discloses the
obtained positions (see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “With the aid of the smart tag 2.1 and 2.3, information about the movements and positions of the animals 4.1 and 4.2 is obtained”) of the individual animals (Fig. 1, 4.1 & 4.2 and see at least para. [0016] of Karsijns which discloses “positions of the animals 4.1 and 4.2 is obtained”), and to control the operation of the one or more of the plural mobile agricultural devices (20) (see at least para. [0009] of Karsijns which discloses “the control unit, is configured for, at least on the basis of information which has been received from at least one smart tag, selecting at least one farm unit for control by the control unit, more particularly, selecting an activity that needs to be carried out and accordingly controlling a farm unit for carrying out the selected activity”, *Examiner interprets this as the control arrangement automatically controlling an operation of the agricultural device and see at least para. [0017] of Karsijns which discloses “When the animals 4.1 and 4.2 are in the cow box 30, and this is determined by the control unit 8 with the aid of the smart tags 2.1 and 2.3, the control unit 8 can switch the cleaning robot 16 on for cleaning the area 32 of the stable 3 which is outside the cow box 30”, *Examiner interprets an operation of the mobile agricultural devices 16 will be controlled based on the positions of the individual animals 4.1/4.2) and see at least para. [0018] of Karsijns which discloses “on the basis of processed information that is obtained from a smart tag, a farm unit is controlled. This information can for instance relate to the position of the animal. The position of the animal then determines, for instance, where the dung robot can move to. … Then, in a second step, on the basis of a determined animal status, at least one of the farm units can be controlled”, *Examiner interprets this to be the automatic control of the agricultural devices based on positions of the animals which can also be considered to be the number of animals in a certain space).
Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, may not explicitly disclose a
calculated density of animals (10).
However, in the same field of endeavor, Fujiyama discloses a calculated density of
animals (see at least para. [0110] which discloses “The weight estimation unit 27 estimates the weight of a domestic animal by multiplying the volume of the domestic animal calculated on the basis of the estimated three-dimensional shape and a pre-measured average density of a domestic animal of the same type as the domestic animal whose volume is calculated”, *Examiner interprets this measured average density to be the claimed calculated density).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to further modify the control arrangement of Karsijns as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, to include a calculation of animal density as disclosed in Fujiyama with a reasonable expectation of success in order to more efficiently control and use mobile agricultural devices so that safety is increased while performing certain agricultural tasks. See para. [0110] and [0117] of Fujiyama for motivation.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsijns et al. (US 2017/0303505 A1) in view of O’Hare (US 2011/0298619 A1) and further in view of Van den Berg (US 2003/0154925 A1) and further in view of Beaulieu et al. (US 2015/0161872 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Karsijns, as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg discloses the
method according to claim 18 for controlling mobile agricultural devices (Fig. 1, 12.1-12.4; 10.1-10.3 and 16 of Karsijns and see at least para. [0015] of Karsijns which discloses “four milking robots 12.1-12.4 …the system comprises a cleaning robot 16 for cleaning the stable … “the feeding units 10.1-10.3“, *Examiner interprets all of these devices to be plural mobile agricultural devices).
Karsijns, as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg may not explicitly disclose A non-
transitory computer- readable recording medium with instructions recorded thereon which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method according to claim 18.
However, Beaulieu discloses A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium
with instructions recorded thereon which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method according to claim 18 (see at least para. [0178] of Beaulieu which discloses “the computer-usable and computer executable instructions may reside in any type of non-transitory computer-usable storage medium that can be read by a computer”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to further modify the method of Karsijns, as modified by O’Hare and Van den Berg, to include A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium with instructions recorded thereon which, when executed by a computer, as taught in Beaulieu with a reasonable expectation of success in order to effectively execute the monitoring function and reporting functions the control system. See para. [0178] of Beaulieu for motivation.
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Geissler et al. (US 2011/0169610A1) disclose identification tags can be installed on dairy cows at a dairy farm. Each of these tags can include a processor, memory, antenna, and power store. The memory of the tag stores an identification number associated with the dairy cow to which the tag is attached. The memory of the tag also can store other information pertaining to the dairy cow. Sloth et al. (US 2015/0293205 A1) disclose a computer system for measuring real time position of a plurality of animals, which system receives input from a plurality of sensors, communicating with at least tags carried by the animals, which system based of measurement of delay in radio communication calculates the actual position of the animals. It is the first object of the invention to achieve real time position of animals in a limited area.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANA IVEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4896. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.
/DANA D IVEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/D.D.I/April 20, 2026
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights