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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-18, 25, and 33 are pending in the current application. All pending claims are eligible for examination. Applicant’s claims to priority from US Provisional applications 63/170232 (filed 02 April 2021) and 63/265400 (f9led 14 December 2021) as well as PCT/US2022/023033 (filed 01 April 2022) are acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the clevis pivot" in the final line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim has been interpreted as though “the” read “a”.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 US 112 solely due to its dependency from clam 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jiang et al. (CN 111,656,964 hereinafter Jiang).
With respect to claim 1, Jiang discloses a collection tool comprising:
a drive chassis (in figure 1, Jiang discloses a vehicle with driving wheels 18 and 19; the structure of the vehicle reads on a chassis while the wheels being used for driving reads on the chassis being a drive chassis – see also the paragraph that begins “As shown in FIG. 2-6 . . .” that is three paragraphs before the claims in the translation that is provided herewith; element 1 in figure 2 is a vehicle body, which also reads on a chassis);
a harvester module disposed on the drive chassis (the lift and arm disclosed in figures 1 and 2 of Jiang read on a harvester module because the elements are meant to pick and receive crops), the harvester module including:
a vision system configured to identify target objects (in figure 2, Jiang discloses camera 21, as further described in the first paragraph after the brief descriptions of the drawings); and
a robotic arm (in figure 2, Jiang discloses a robotic arm 2) including a grasper configured to collect the target objects (in figure 2, Jiang discloses grip 22 that reads on a grasper); and
a subsystem including an articulating semi-rigid catch member (in figure 2, Jiang discloses a carrier box 31, scissor mechanism 11, loading mechanism 3, and other mechanisms; the scope of this system includes an articulating semi-rigid catch member because the scissor mechanism 11 articulates; the system is semi-rigid because the scissor mechanism holds the system in place most of the time but can relax or tense to change the position of the box 31), the semi-rigid catch member configured to transition into a retracted state while the drive chassis is in motion and to transition into an extended state while the drive chassis is stationary and the robotic arm is in a process of collecting the target objects (in the fourth paragraph after the brief description of the drawings that begins “As shown in FIG. 1-6, the lug boss . . .”, Jiang discloses that the height of the box 31 is adjusted by the scissor mechanism 11 during the picking of fruit, which reads on the catch member being configured to retract during motion and extend during stationary picking).
With respect to claim 2, Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jiang further discloses the semi-rigid catch member comprises a plurality of linkages (in figure 2, Jiang discloses scissor mechanism as part of a fruit reception system; the scissor mechanism is shown with a plurality of struts, which read on a plurality of linkages because the struts are connected to each other).
With respect to claim 3, Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 2. Jiang further discloses a linear actuator configured to articulate the plurality of linkages between the retracted and extended states (in the first paragraph following the brief description of the drawings, Jiang discloses that the scissor mechanism uses the common cylinder lifting mechanism; cylinder mechanisms are linear actuators).
With respect to claim 4, Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jiang further discloses the semi-rigid catch member comprises a plurality of pivoting panels (in figure 2, Jiang discloses a scissor mechanism composes of a number of struts that are discloses as flat beams that read on panels; the scissoring mechanism reads on the panels being pivoting).
With respect to claim 5, Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 4. Jiang further a linear actuator configured to articulate the plurality of pivoting panels between the retracted and extended states (in the first paragraph following the brief description of the drawings, Jiang discloses that the scissor mechanism uses the common cylinder lifting mechanism; cylinder mechanisms are linear actuators).
With respect to claim 6, Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jiang further discloses the semi-rigid catch member comprises a linear retracting and extending front member (n figure 2, Jiang discloses a box 31 that retracts and extends; since the box is at the distal end of the catch system, it reads on a front member) and a linear actuator configured to retract and extend the front member (in the first paragraph following the brief description of the drawings, Jiang discloses that the scissor mechanism uses the common cylinder lifting mechanism; cylinder mechanisms are linear actuators).
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang in view of Wisdom et al. (US 2021/0368686 hereinafter Wisdom).
With respect to claim 7, Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 3. Jiang further discloses that the system uses a cylinder actuator. Jiang does not disclose the linear actuator includes one or more pneumatic cylinders, linear motor and rail systems, rotary motors with ball or lead screw mechanisms, or hydraulic pistons/diaphragms.
However, Wisdom discloses a linear actuator includes one or more pneumatic cylinders, linear motor and rail systems, rotary motors with ball or lead screw mechanisms, or hydraulic pistons/diaphragms (in paragraph 95, Wisdom discloses the use of a pneumatic cylinder in a fruit harvesting system).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to substitute the pneumatic cylinder of Wisdom for the general cylinder of Jiang because the substituted components and their functions were known in the art. The predictable result of the substitution is an actuator that behaves according to the specifics of a pneumatic cylinder (see MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
Claim(s) 1, 8-9, 16-18, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (WO 2008/140329) in view of Jiang.
With respect to claim 1, King discloses a collection tool comprising:
a drive chassis (in figure 8 and the abstract, King discloses a vehicle that has a collection system 30 attached thereto – the vehicle includes wheels and a body, which anticipate a drive chassis; the abstract describes the vehicle as a mobile machine); and
a subsystem including an articulating semi-rigid catch member, the semi-rigid catch member configured to transition into a retracted state while the drive chassis is in motion and to transition into an extended state while the drive chassis is stationary and the robotic arm is in a process of collecting the target objects (in the abstract and figures 1 and 8-11, King discloses an apparatus that is extended to catch fruit that is shaken off of a tree and then retracted to collect the fruit onto the vehicle; note in the final paragraph of page 9 that King discloses part of the catching apparatus to be “semi-rigid”; in the figures, element 30 is a mat/apron that can be put in a catching position, as described in the second paragraph of page 10 – a mat or apron also reads on semi-rigid).
King does not disclose a harvester module disposed on the drive chassis, where the harvester module includes: a vision system configured to identify target objects; and a robotic arm including a grasper configured to collect the target objects.
However, Jiang discloses a harvester module disposed on the drive chassis, where the harvester module includes: a vision system configured to identify target objects; and a robotic arm including a grasper configured to collect the target objects (in figure 2, Jiang discloses a vision system and robotic arm including a grasper that are disposed on the chassis of a fruit collection vehicle).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to combine the vision system and collection arm with grasper of Jiang with the deployable fruit collection vehicle of King because each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. The predictable result of the combination would be a harvesting vehicle that does not rely on fruit falling from a shaken tree but can rather pluck crops that remain on the tree and then efficiently place the crops in a collection area (see MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
With respect to claims 8 and 18, King in view of Jiang discloses the limitations of, respectively, claims 1 and 9. King in view of Jiang further discloses a target surface connected to the semi-rigid catch member and formed of a compliant material configured to receive collected target objects and to direct the target objects through an outlet (in figure 11, King discloses directing collected fruit into a bin; the portion of the mat/apron that is closest to the vehicle serves as the outlet; the apron/mat 30 reads on a target surface formed of a compliant material).
With respect to claim 9, King in view of Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 1. King in view of Jiang further discloses the semi-rigid catch member comprises a dynamically adjustable and flexible hoop (in figure 1, King discloses the fruit collection apparatus 10 forms a circular mat when deployed – the rim of this mat or apron reads on a hoop; as disclosed by comparing figures 1-3, the apparatus is adjustable, with the rim or hoop being flexible; as shown in figure 1, the lip of the apron between explicitly rigid members – like battens 31 – is curved, which renders obvious a structure that supports curving apron material).
With respect to claim 16, King in view of Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 9. King in view of Jiang further discloses the hoop has a first area in a retracted position and a second area greater than the first area in an extended position (in a comparison of figure 1, where the hoop is in an extended position, and figure 3, where the hoop is retracted, King discloses that the area of the hoop is greater in its extended position).
With respect to claim 17, King in view of Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 9. King in view of Jiang further discloses a front portion of the hoop is configured to conform to an obstacle impacted by the hoop (in the abstract, King discloses a flexible mat or apron 30 – as seen in figure 1, this flexible material is towards the leading edge of the hoop and, because it is flexible, can conform to obstacles impacted by the hoop).
With respect to claim 25, King discloses a collection tool comprising:
a drive chassis (in figure 8 and the abstract, King discloses a vehicle that has a collection system 30 attached thereto – the vehicle includes wheels and a body, which anticipate a drive chassis; the abstract describes the vehicle as a mobile machine); and
a comprehensive landing zone for target objects dropped including a flexible fabric structure mounted to static points on the collection tool (in the abstract, King discloses an apron or mat – which reads on a flexible fabric structure; as shown in figure 1, King discloses that the apron reads on a comprehensive landing zone for targets dropped thereon; in figure 8, King discloses the apron or mat attached at the vehicle at static points, such as the hinge point towards the back of the vehicle around which the boom rotates).
King does not disclose a harvester module disposed on the drive chassis, where the harvester module includes: a vision system configured to identify target objects; and a robotic arm including a grasper configured to collect the target objects.
However, Jiang discloses a harvester module disposed on the drive chassis, where the harvester module includes: a vision system configured to identify target objects; and a robotic arm including a grasper configured to collect the target objects (in figure 2, Jiang discloses a vision system and robotic arm including a grasper that are disposed on the chassis of a fruit collection vehicle).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to combine the vision system and collection arm with grasper of Jiang with the deployable fruit collection vehicle of King because each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. The predictable result of the combination would be a harvesting vehicle that does not rely on fruit falling from a shaken tree but can rather pluck crops that remain on the tree and then efficiently place the crops in a collection area (see MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King in view of Jiang as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Stackhouse (US 2017/0215341).
With respect to claim 10, King in view of Jiang discloses the limitations of claim 9. King in view of Jiang does not disclose the hoop includes a flexible hinged roller chain. However, Stackhouse discloses a hoop including a flexible hinged roller chain (in figure 4, Stackhouse discloses a roller chain 3010 that defines a loop; the shape of the loop can change depending on how far apart the jaws of a tree shaker are spaced; roller chain is always flexible and renders obvious being hinged).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to combine the roller chain of Stackhouse with the rim of the apron of King in view of Jiang because each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. The predictable result of the combination is an apron that maintains its outer rim but is also adjustable between positions (see MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
With respect to claim 11, King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse discloses the limitations of claim 10. King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse further discloses the hoop includes a flexible bar element (in figure 4, Stackhouse discloses roller chain, which is a series of links, where the series of links reads on a flexible bar element).
With respect to claim 12, King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse discloses the limitations of claim 10. King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse further discloses a double-acting linear actuator configured to retract and extend the hoop (in the third paragraph on page 7 that begins “The control arms . . .”, King discloses a piston rod 39 that extends and retracts the hoop, as detailed in this paragraph and the next two).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Wisdom.
With respect to claim 13, King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse discloses the limitations of claim 12. King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse further discloses the actuator has one end affixed to a side of the collection tool and having a single rotational degree of freedom (In figure 1, King discloses an hydraulic piston 39 affixed to the rim of the hoop, which is part of the collection tool; the use of the cylinder to extend and retract the apron renders a degree of rotational freedom obvious). King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse does not disclose the double-acting linear actuator is a pneumatic cylinder.
However, Wisdom discloses a linear actuator is a pneumatic cylinder (in paragraph 95, Wisdom discloses the use of a pneumatic cylinder in a fruit harvesting system).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to substitute the pneumatic cylinder of Wisdom for the hydraulic cylinder of King in view of Jiang and Stackhouse because the substituted components and their functions were known in the art. The predictable result of the substitution is an actuator that behaves according to the specifics of a pneumatic cylinder (see MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerber (US 4674265) in view of Jiang.
With respect to claim 33, Gerber discloses a system for collecting agricultural products from a crop row comprising:
a collection tool including:
a drive chassis (in figure 16, Gerber discloses a vehicle which renders obvious a drive chassis);
a catch system including:
a trough-shaped catch zone extending substantially along a full length of the crop row formed of a compliant material and including an outlet (in figure 16, Gerber discloses trough 280 that receives picked fruit, as described in lines 17-27 of column 15; this paragraph also describes the material of the trough as resilient material that will cushion the fruit; the length of this crop row is quite short; as shown in figure 16 and lines 24-27 of column 15, the trough 280 includes an outlet); and
a conveyance zone disposed below the outlet of the catch zone (in lines 24-27 of column 15 and figure 16, Gerber discloses rough 282 which leads to storage bin 260; the trough 280 is sloped downwards towards trough 282, which means that trough 282 is disposed below the outlet of trough 280) and including a conveyor configured to transport target objects to a collection bin (as shown in figure 16, fruit is conveyed to collection bin 260 – gravity is the motive force of this conveyance).
Gerber does not disclose:
a harvester module disposed on the drive chassis, the harvester module including:
a vision system configured to identify target objects; and
a robotic arm including a grasper configured to collect the target objects; and
However, Jiang discloses:
a harvester module disposed on the drive chassis (the lift and arm disclosed in figures 1 and 2 of Jiang read on a harvester module because the elements are meant to pick and receive crops), the harvester module including:
a vision system configured to identify target objects (in figure 2, Jiang discloses camera 21, as further described in the first paragraph after the brief descriptions of the drawings); and
a robotic arm (in figure 2, Jiang discloses a robotic arm 2) including a grasper configured to collect the target objects (in figure 2, Jiang discloses grip 22 that reads on a grasper).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant application to substitute the harvester module of Jiang for the people who pick fruit that is placed on the harvesting machine of Gerber because the substituted components and their functions were known in the art. The predictable result of this substitution would be an autonomous or semi-autonomous fruit harvesting machine that could pick fruit without the need for human labor (see MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
Allowable Subject Matter
If claims 14 and 15 were not rejected under 35 USC 112, they would be objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Andros et al. (US 2015/0284191) discloses a conveyor belt in front of row crops in the abstract.
Geurts (US 2022/0248603) discloses an over-the-row harvester that can extend harvesting bins (paragraph 14).
Volin (US 2021/0301550) discloses a net-like device for collecting fruit and nuts in figure 1G – see the title as well.
Heard (US 5956933) discloses a fruit harvester with a conveyor belt in a trough, as shown in figure 2.
Hiyama et al. (4255922) discloses an harvester with a collection trough 347, shown in figure 11.
Toomer (3705485) discloses a berry-collection trough, shown in figure 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS JAMES MEISLAHN whose telephone number is (703)756-1925. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:30 EST M-Th, M-F.
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, Joseph Rocca can be reached at (571) 272-8971. 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.
/DOUGLAS J MEISLAHN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/JOSEPH M ROCCA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671