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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Request for Continued Examination dated Jun 18, 2026. Claims 1, 3-8, and 10-15 and 17-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the rejections under 35 USC 101, Applicant’s amendments have overcome these rejections.
With respect to the prior art rejections, Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 7-8 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0239416, to Green et al. (hereinafter Green), in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0167605, to Janssen et al. (hereinafter Janssen), and in further view of website article ‘How Close to My Well Can I Use Round-Up?,’ located at www.weekand.com/home-garden/article/close-well-can-use-roundup-18007911.php, to Cassandra Maier (hereinafter Maier).
As per claim 1, and similarly with respect to claims 8 and 15, Green discloses a method for generating an application plan for applying agricultural material to a zone of a geographic area (e.g. see Abstract and para 0379, wherein a support system is provided for generating a trajectory to be followed by an agricultural work vehicle being configured for fertilizing (i.e. applying agricultural material)), the method comprising: identifying a feature in the zone (e.g. see Fig. 25, and paras 0015 and 0293-0297, wherein the system includes a mapping unit configured for receiving boundaries of one or more obstacles within a field, the obstacle being defined by an obstacle polygon 12); identifying an offset from the feature based on a type of the feature (e.g. see Fig. 26 and paras 0293-0297, wherein the system utilizes a method of forming a headland 14’ (i.e. offset) from the obstacle, the offset being based upon a requirement that the obstacle must be avoided (i.e. see para 0005)) and agricultural material to be applied to the zone (e.g. see para 0379, wherein the headland is generated during fertilizing (i.e. based upon agricultural material to be applied)); determining an area adjacent to the feature based on the offset (e.g. see Fig. 26 and para 0296, wherein the headline 14’ adjacent the obstacle is define by an area between an outer periphery 18’ and an inner periphery 20’); … and transmitting the application plan to an agricultural machine to configure the agricultural machine to operate based on the application plan (e.g. see Fig. 29, and para 0311, wherein a path 28 is generated for an agricultural work vehicle to travel within the field), wherein the application plan comprises: 1) a plurality of geographic coordinates identifying the zone and the area adjacent to the feature (e.g. see Figs. 28-29, and para 0015, wherein the mapping unit receives coordinates relating to boundaries of obstacles), and 2) an application rate of agricultural material to be applied to the zone (e.g. see Abstract and para 0379, wherein a support system is provided for generating a trajectory to be followed by an agricultural work vehicle being configured for fertilizing (i.e. applying agricultural material); the Office further notes that a rate of fertilizer must be determined to avoid under-fertilization and over-fertilization)…operating the agricultural machine based on the application plan (e.g. see Fig. 29, and para 0311, wherein a path 28 is generated for an agricultural work vehicle to travel within the field).
Green fails to disclose determining application restrictions for the area adjacent to the feature and wherein the application plane comprises…an application rate of agricultural material to be applied to … the area adjacent to the feature. However, Janssen teaches a vehicle device and method for treatment of a field, wherein the method takes into consideration restriction data to prevent leaching of material into ground water, the method forming buffer zones around the restricted area (i.e. application restriction about a feature and the application rate being reduced or eliminated about the feature) (e.g. see at least Abstract and para 0045). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the fertilization system of Green to including avoiding fertilization about a protected feature to prevent contamination thereof.
Green fails to disclose determining application restrictions for the area adjacent to the feature based on the feature and the agricultural material. However, Maier teaches application restrictions of pesticides, fertilizers or herbicides (i.e. agricultural material) should be at least 100 feet from a well head (i.e. feature) (e.g. see p. 4). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the fertilization system of Green to including avoiding fertilization about a protected feature to prevent contamination thereof.
As per claim 7, and similarly with respect to claim 14, Green, as modified by Janssen, teaches the features of claims 1 and 8, respectively, and Janssen further teaches wherein application rates vary in different areas of the zone based on the agricultural material, the zone, and the feature (e.g. Janssen teaches a vehicle device and method for treatment of a field, wherein the method takes into consideration restriction data to prevent leaching of material into ground water, the method forming buffer zones around the restricted area (i.e. application restriction about a feature and the application rate being reduced or eliminated about the feature) (e.g. see at least Abstract and para 0045). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the fertilization system of Green to including avoiding fertilization about a protected feature to prevent contamination thereof.
Claims 3, 4, 10, 11, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0239416, to Green et al. (hereinafter Green), in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0167605, to Janssen et al. (hereinafter Janssen), and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0272907, to Geltner.
As per claim 3, and similarly with respect to claims 10 and 17, Green, as modified by Janssen, teaches the features of claims 2, 9 and 16, respectively, but fails to teach further comprising: receiving application data from the agricultural machine; and storing the application data in an application history database. However, Geltner teaches systems and methods of managing plant growth zones including recording various tasks including pesticide treatments (e.g. see Abstract and para 0016). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the fertilization system of Green to including recording treatment of a field for the purpose of over treating the same.
As per claim 4, and similarly with respect to claims 11 and 18, Green, as modified by Janssen and Geltner, teaches the features of claims 3, 10 and 17, respectively, and Geltner further teaches wherein the application data is generated based on the operating (e.g. see Abstract and para 0016, wherein Geltner teaches systems and methods of managing plant growth zones including recording various tasks including pesticide treatments (i.e. during operation)). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the fertilization system of Green to include recording treatment of a field for the purpose of over treating the same.
Claims 5, 6, 12, 13, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0239416, to Green et al. (hereinafter Green), in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0167605, to Janssen et al. (hereinafter Janssen), in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0272907, to Geltner, and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0211026, to McCann et al. (hereinafter McCann).
As per claim 5, and similarly with respect to claims 12 and 19, Green, as modified by Janssen and Geltner, teaches the features of claims 3, 10 and 17, respectively, but fails to teach wherein the application data deviates from the application plan. However, McCann teaches treatment of a field with pesticides, by an autonomous drone, wherein based upon detection of an obstacle, the drone avoids the objects causing the application data to deviate from an initial plan or route (e.g. see at least Abstract and paras 0099-0100). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the fertilization system of Green to include modifying a route of an spray application device when an obstacle is detected for the purpose of avoiding collision or treatment of an area which could be harmful.
As per claim 6, and similarly with respect to claims 13 and 20, Green, as modified by Janssen, Geltner and McCann, teaches the features of claims 5, 12 and 19, respectively, and McCann further teaches wherein the application data deviates from the application plan due to obstacles in the geographic area (e.g. see at least Abstract and paras 0099-0100, wherein McCann teaches treatment of a field with pesticides, by an autonomous drone, wherein based upon detection of an obstacle, the drone avoids the objects causing the application data to deviate from an initial plan or route (e.g. see at least Abstract and paras 0099-0100). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicants’ invention to modify the fertilization system of Green to include modifying a route of an spray application device when an obstacle is detected for the purpose of avoiding collision or treatment of an area which could be harmful.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James M. McPherson whose telephone number is (313) 446-6543. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5PM Mon-Fri Eastern Alt Fri. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Flynn can be reached on 571 272-9855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES M MCPHERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663B
Prosecution Insights