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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it begins with: “Described is”. Further the abstract is over 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 8 and 28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8, line 5: “and one or more lifting systems” should read: “the one or more lifting systems”.
Claim 28 line 8: “displacing the fiber plants to the determined” appears as though it should read: “displacing the respective cutters to their determined”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 13-14 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 13 refers to: “a cutting system”. Claim 1 refers to: “a displaceable top cutter”. It is unclear if the cutting system is referring to the top cutter unit. It is unclear if the “cutting system” is in reference to multiple cutters to include the root cutting system in the specification. From a review of the specification and drawing no other cutting systems are apparent.
Depending claims are rejected for depending from a rejected base claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-10, 12, 15-20, 22-23, 25-27 and 29-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Puyvelde (USPN 12408591) in view of Dehondt (EP 3272202) in further view of Gunda (USPN 11744180).
Regarding claim 1, Van Puyvelde discloses the use of two separate cutting mechanisms for cutting fiber plants at equal lengths (Figure 1). Van Puyvelde discloses the general notion of a self-propelled machine and laying the two different lengths side by side (Figure 2), however Van Puyvelde is lacking details of the machine.
Dehondt discloses a fiber processing machine with a cutting mechanism and teaches details of the machine lacking in Van Puyvelde.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the two separate cutting mechanisms of Van Puyvelde with the self-propelled machine of Dehondt for the purpose of providing details of a machine capable to perform the disclosed function of Van Puyvelde.
The combination discloses a processing machine configured to process fiber plants, the processing machine comprising: a self-propelling vehicle (Dehondt, figure 1, element 1) comprising a vehicle chassis (10) with, disposed thereon, at least three wheels (12) and a drive motor (16) configured to drive at least two of the wheels, the vehicle chassis being provided with: a first conveyor configured to transport at least parts of the fiber plants from a first end to an opposite second end, and a second conveyor configured to transport at least parts of the fiber plants from the first end to the second end (Dehondt, Double conveyors 42),
first and second delivering devices (Figure 2 pointed to by indicators 46) provided at or close to the second end to deliver and place the fiber plants respectively coming from the first and second conveyors on a ground surface,
a picking system (Van Puyvelde figure 1) configured to pick the fiber plants and process the fiber plants further, the picking system comprising a lower picking element and an upper picking element configured to respectively pick a lower part (11) of the fiber plants and an upper part (12) of the fiber plants, the upper picking element being configured to pivot relative to the lower picking element (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-42 discloses individual height adjustment. Dehondt figure 4 shows an example of a pivotal connection to the machine via actuator 105 and axis 103. The combination would be considered to have both picking elements pivotally attached and individually adjustable),
a displaceable top cutter (Van Puyvelde element 8’ column 6 lines 25-37) configured to cut top parts off the fiber plants at a specific length,
one or more lifting systems (Dehondt figure 4 shows lifting system 105, the combination would be considered to comprise a separate one for each head to allow for individual adjustment) configured to pivot the lower and upper picking elements relative to each other and relative to the vehicle chassis.
The combination is lacking mention of:
“an electronic controller configured to determine a height value representative of a height of the fiber plants, the electronic controller being configured to determine specific positions of the pivotable lower picking element and the pivotable upper picking element, based on the determined height value of the fiber plants.”
Gunda discloses a harvester with multiple height adjustable cutting elements (30/34) and teaches the use of an electronic controller that receives data from a sensor (66) to determines a height value of crop (column 4 lines 15) and then to control the specific position of multiple height adjustable cutting elements based on the height value (Column 4 lines 5-11 and column 5 lines 64-67).
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 combination by adding a controller and sensor system capable of controlling multiple cutting elements at different heights based off sensor input of crop height as taught by Gunda for the purpose of automating an operator’s manual activity to achieve easier control of the harvester during operation.
Regarding claim 2, the combination discloses wherein the electronic controller is configured both to control the one or more lifting systems of the lower picking element and to control the one or more lifting systems of the upper picking elements to pivot the lower picking element and the upper picking element to the respective determined specific positions independently of each other (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function).
Regarding claim 3, the combination discloses wherein the electronic controller is configured to determine a particular position of the top cutter and to control at least one actuator whereby the top cutter is displaceable to the determined particular position relative to one or more of the lower picking element and the upper picking element, based on the determined height value of the fiber plants,
wherein the at least one actuator is configured to displace the top cutter to the determined particular position independently of displacement of the lower picking element and the upper picking element (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. column 6 lines 25-37 discloses the use of a top cutter 8’. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function. Some form of actuator would need to exist to perform the individual control of the cutter bar.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination discloses at least one of a displaceable root cutter (Van Puyvelde figure 1, cutter 8 attached to the lower head is considered to be a root cutter displaceable with the lower picking head) configured to cut roots off the fiber plants at a specific length and a displaceable fiber plant cutter (Cutter 8 attached to the upper picking head) configured to cut the fiber plants,
wherein the electronic controller being configured to determine the specific positions of one or more of the displaceable root cutter and the displaceable fiber plant cutter cutting unit, based on the determined height value of the fiber plants (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function).
Regarding claim 6, the combination discloses an input unit device coupled to the electronic controller and configured to allow manual input of the height value and to transmit an input height value to the electronic controller unit (The controller would be considered to comprise some form of operator input device to manually input a desired height as some form of calibration or initial setting would be required to perform the automated function).
Further, Examiner takes official notice, that it is old and well known in the art of harvesting for control systems of components to allow for both automatic and manual operation and to switch between these functions. Therefore, it would be obvious for the control system of the combination to comprise some form of input device to allow the operator to have manual control when desired.
Regarding claim 7, the combination discloses a camera system with at least one camera, the camera system being configured to record images of the fiber plants to be processed and to generate an image signal which is representative of the recorded images, wherein the electronic controller is coupled to the camera system and the camera system is configured to determine the height value of the fiber plants based on the image signal (Gunda discloses the use of a vision sensor, column 4 line 2).
Regarding claim 9, the combination discloses, further comprising a first lifting system and a second lifting system configured to individually respectively pivot the lower picking element and the upper picking element (Dehondt figure 4 shows lifting system 105, the combination would be considered to comprise a separate one for each head to allow for individual adjustment).
Regarding claim 10, the combination discloses wherein the second lifting system is disposed between the lower and upper picking elements and configured to pivot the upper picking element relative to the lower picking element (As the second actuator would be attached to the upper picking element which is above the lower picking element, the second actuator would be considered to “be disposed” between the two as the second actuator would have to be at least partially above the lower picking element. As the picking units are individually pivotable, the upper would pivot relative to the lower).
Regarding claim 12, the combination discloses wherein both the upper picking element and the lower picking element are couplable to the vehicle chassis via hinges (Dehondt figure 4 shows the head pivotally attached either directly un indirectly to the vehicle chassis. In the combination with two independent heads each would be considered to be pivotally attached either directly or indirectly to the vehicle chassis).
Regarding claim 15, the combination discloses a transport installation (Van Puyvelde figure 3) configured to grip the fiber plants and transport the fiber plants to the first and second conveyors of the vehicle (Gripped via belts trained about pulleys).
Regarding claim 16, the combination discloses wherein the transport installation is configured to rotate the fiber plants during transport (Van Puyvelde figure 3 shows the top of the system rotates the fiber plants as is well known in this type of transport assembly of the prior art).
Regarding claim 17, the combination discloses wherein one or more of: ii the transport installation of the first upper and second lower picking unit elements is configured to turn the fiber plants from a substantially upright position to a substantially lying position (Van Puyvelde figure 3 shows the top of the system rotates the fiber plants as is well known in this type of transport assembly of the prior art from a standing position to a lying position).
Regarding claim 18, the combination discloses wherein the transport installation is arranged disposed on at least one of the first lower picking element unit, the upper second picking element unit, and the picking system pick-up unit (The transport installation is considered to be on both the lower and upper picking element).
Regarding claim 19, the combination discloses wherein both the upper and the lower picking elements comprise two pairs of endless conveyor belts (Van Puyvelde figure 3 shows the use of two belts as is old and well known in this type of picking head) to grip and transport the fiber plants in each case at two positions for each of the two heights (The transport installation is considered to be on both the lower and upper picking element of the combination).
Regarding claim 20, the combination discloses wherein the upper picking element comprises an upper transport installation (Van Puyvelde figure 3) configured to grip and transport the upper part of the fiber plant to the first conveyor of the vehicle and the lower picking element comprises a lower transport installation configured to grip and transport the upper part of the fiber plant to the second conveyor of the vehicle (The transport installation is considered to be on both the lower and upper picking element of the combination).
Regarding claim 22, the combination discloses wherein the electronic controller is configured to periodically repeat determining the height value of the fiber plants and determining the specific positions, and to periodically control at least one of the picking elements, the top cutter, the root cutter, and the displaceable fiber plant cutter during travel of the vehicle (The controller of the combination is considered to continuously determine height and adjustment during operation. Gunda column 6 lines 13-17).
Regarding claim 23, the combination discloses a collector configured to collect and store therein cut-off parts of picked fiber plants including top parts of fiber plants (Van Puyvelde Column 4 lines 65-67 and Column 5 lines 10-12. Collection of the top parts would comprise some form of collector).
Regarding claim 25, the combination discloses a method comprising driving the processing machine over the ground surface and picking the fiber plants while driving the processing machine, and then processing the fiber plants and thereafter placing the processed fiber plants back onto the ground (Van Puyvelde figures 2, column 6 lines 60-67 and column 7 lines 1-6 discloses laying the processed plants into swaths);
the method further comprising of: determining the height value representative of the height of the fiber plants to be picked by the electronic controller and determining specific positions of the pivotable lower picking element, the pivotable upper picking element, and the displaceable top cutter, based on the determined height value (The electric control system of the rejection presented in claim 1 would perform the claimed function).
Regarding claim 26, the combination discloses controlling both the one or more lifting systems of the lower picking element and the one or more lifting systems of the upper picking elements to pivot the lower picking element and the upper picking element to the respective determined specific positions independently of each other (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function).
Regarding claim 27, the combination discloses determining a specific position of the top cutter based on the determined height value of the fiber plants; controlling at least one actuator such that the top cutting unit cutter is displaceable to the determined specific position relative to one or more of the lower picking element and the upper picking element; and, displacing the top cutting unit cutter to the determined specific position independently of displacement of the lower picking element and the upper picking element (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. Column 6 lines 25-37 discloses the use of a top cutter 8’. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function. Some form of actuator would need to exist to perform the individual control of the cutter bar).
Regarding claim 29, the combination discloses controlling at least one of a first actuator of the top cutter (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. column 6 lines 25-37 discloses the use of a top cutter 8’. Some form of actuator would need to exist to perform the individual control of the cutter bar 8’), a second actuator of a root cutter (Van Puyvelde figure 1, cutter 8 attached to the lower head is considered to be a root cutter displaceable with the lower picking head via an actuator 105 as taught by Dehondt, figure 4 shows lifting system 105), and a third actuator (Cutter 8 attached to the upper picking head) of a fiber plant cutter configured to cut the fiber plants.
Regarding claim 30, the combination discloses receiving the height value by means of the electronic controller via an input unit, such as a keyboard, device coupled thereto (The controller would be considered to comprise some form of operator input device to manually input a desired height as some form of calibration or initial setting would be required to perform the automated function).
Examiner further takes official notice, that it is old and well known in the art of harvesting for control systems of components to allow for both automatic and manual operation. Therefore, it would be obvious for the control system of the combination to comprise some form of input device to allow the operator to have manual control when desired.
Regarding claim 31, the combination discloses recording images of the fiber plants to be processed with a camera system with at least one camera and generating an image signal which is representative of the recorded images; and determining the height value of the fiber plants by the electronic controller coupled to the camera system, based on the image signal unit (Gunda discloses the use of a vision sensor, column 4 line 2).
Regarding claim 32, the combination discloses respectively individually pivoting the lower and upper picking elements to achieve the specific positions for the lower and upper picking elements (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function).
Regarding claim 33, the combination discloses gripping the upper parts of the fiber plants with the upper picking element (Van Puyvelde figure 3 shows that the displayed head would grip the tops of the plant);
cutting the gripped upper parts of the fiber plants loose with the top cutter (Van Puyvelde top cutter 8’ would cut the tops off the plants);
transporting the upper parts of the fiber plants which have been cut loose to the first conveyor of the vehicle (via assembly shown in Van Puyvelde figure 3);
gripping lower parts of the fiber plants with the lower picking element (Van Puyvelde figure 3 shows that the displayed head would grip the bottoms of the plant, the top and bottom head would be equivalent);
transporting the gripped lower parts of the fiber plants to the second conveyor of the vehicle (via assembly shown in Van Puyvelde figure 3);
transporting the upper and lower parts of the fiber plants respectively on the first and second conveyors (Dehondt, Double conveyors 42);
placing the upper parts of the fiber plants on the ground in a first row with the first delivering system; and placing the lower parts of the fiber plants on the ground in a second row, parallel to the first row, with the second delivering system (Van Puyvelde figures 2 show laying the plants in swaths side by side),
and optionally pivoting one or more of the lower picking element and the upper picking element relative to the vehicle, and pivoting the top cutter relative to the upper picking element, to set a length of the lower parts and a length of the upper parts of the fiber plants, based on the specific positions determined by the electronic controller (As the phrase begins with “optionally” the combination is considered to already meet the claim limitations. Further, Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function).
Regarding claim 34, the combination discloses cutting root parts off the lower parts of the fiber plants at the respective specific positions (Van Puyvelde figure 1 shows a cutter 8 on the lower collecting head which would cut the roots off).
Regarding claim 35, the combination discloses periodically repeating the determination of a the determining the height value which is representative of the height of the fiber plants which are about to be processed (The controller of the combination is considered to continuously determine height and adjustment during operation. Gunda column 6 lines 13-17.)
Regarding claim 36, the combination discloses during travel, periodically repeating determining based on an image signal of the height value of the fiber plants which are about to be processed (The controller of the combination is considered to continuously determine height and adjustment during operation. Gunda column 6 lines 13-17)
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Puyvelde (USPN 12408591) in view of Dehondt (EP 3272202) in view of Gunda (USPN 11744180) as applied to claim 1 in further view of Wright (3508387).
Regarding claim 13, the combination as previously presented discloses further comprising a cutting system (System to include all cutters of Van Puyvelde displaceable top cutter 8”, and upper and lower cutters 8) configured to cut the fiber plants in the lower part and the upper part (The cutter system cuts various portions of the plants).
The cutter system of Van Puyvelde has a top cutter that is above the top picker unit but Van Puyvelde does not disclose that the top cutter is mounted to the upper picking unit.
Wright discloses a header picking unit which also comprises a top cutter (Figure 1 element 54) and teaches where the top cutter(54) is mounted to the lower header unit to be displaceably attached (about axis 56 via actuator).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to attach the top cutter of Van Puyvelde of the combination to the top picker of Van Puyvelde of for displaceable adjustment as taught by Wright to provide a more compact design and system where the top cutter can pivot and function easily in relationship to the main header picker below.
Regarding claim 14, the combination discloses wherein the cutting unit system is disposed via a displaceable support on the upper picking element, the displaceable support comprising an actuator (shown in Wright figure 1) coupled to the electronic controller configured to cause the electronic controller to adjust the height of the cutting unit system relative to the rest of the upper picking element (Van Puyvelde column 3 lines 41-43 discloses that the cutting heights may be set individually. Therefore, the controller of the combination would be considered to meet this desired function).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 8, 11, 21, 24 and 28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Depoortere FR 3097717
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM J BEHRENS whose telephone number is (303)297-4336. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-2pm MST.
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 M. 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.
/ADAM J BEHRENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671