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 .
Claims 1-30 have been examined.
P = paragraph e.g. P[0001] = paragraph[0001]
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “true time delay unit” in claims 3, 13 and 23. According to Page 7167 of the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 2011, Notices), “C. Interpreting Claim Limitations Under § 112, ¶6”, the terms "module" and "unit" are non-structural terms which invoke 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Page 11 of the specification recites “Phased antenna arrays 112, as noted above, may include analog phase shifters 113 that adjust the phase angle in the beam propagation, or time-delay units that introduce a time delay in the beam propagation”.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites the limitation “modeling the input data in a plurality of data processing elements configured to measure the one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics and analyze the item of agricultural interest, by:”, however, the limitations following this limitation do not recite any “modeling” and do not recite any “data processing elements”. As a result, the limitations that follow this limitation do not appear to be related to this “modeling”, and the wording of the claim and the use of “by:” is then misleading and improper, as the limitations following the colon do not in fact further limit the “modeling”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites the limitation “A method, comprising: configuring a beamforming operation, by identifying one or more beam scan angles for a phased antenna array configured with agricultural machinery”, however, no other mention of “beamforming” is provided in the claim, and there is no indication that the steps of the claim result in “configuring a beamforming operation”, which causes the claim to be improper, as the claim does not in fact appear to be directed to “configuring a beamforming operation” as no “beamforming operation” is performed or required. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 7, 17, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As per Claim 7, the subject matter is the claimed “wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data”.
There is no disclosure of an algorithm that describes exactly how the “inertial measurement unit data” is used to calculate “a mounting angle of the phased antenna array” relative to “one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest”.
The term “mounting angle” is mentioned only once in the specification, where page 19 of the specification recites “Each module 510 and 520 may be equipped to communicate with an inertial measurement unit (IMU) to determine the mounting angle of the modules 510 and 520”. However, the description “to determine the mounting angle of the modules 510 and 520” is an intended use description, and no algorithm or process for actually determining any “mounting angle” is disclosed.
As such, there is no indication in the specification that the inventors had possession of the system of claim 1, further comprising adjusting the beamforming operation, by determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates an orientation of agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data, and wherein an inertial measurement unit is queried to determine the orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to a beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll.
As per Claim 17, the subject matter is the claimed “wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data”.
There is no disclosure of an algorithm that describes exactly how the “inertial measurement unit data” is used to calculate “a mounting angle of the phased antenna array” relative to “one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest”.
The term “mounting angle” is mentioned only once in the specification, where page 19 of the specification recites “Each module 510 and 520 may be equipped to communicate with an inertial measurement unit (IMU) to determine the mounting angle of the modules 510 and 520”. However, the description “to determine the mounting angle of the modules 510 and 520” is an intended use description, and no algorithm or process for actually determining any “mounting angle” is disclosed.
As such, there is no indication in the specification that the inventors had possession of the method of claim 11, further comprising adjusting the beamforming operation, by querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, and determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data.
As per Claim 27, the subject matter is the claimed “wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data”.
There is no disclosure of an algorithm that describes exactly how the “inertial measurement unit data” is used to calculate “a mounting angle of the phased antenna array” relative to “one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest”.
The term “mounting angle” is mentioned only once in the specification, where page 19 of the specification recites “Each module 510 and 520 may be equipped to communicate with an inertial measurement unit (IMU) to determine the mounting angle of the modules 510 and 520”. However, the description “to determine the mounting angle of the modules 510 and 520” is an intended use description, and no algorithm or process for actually determining any “mounting angle” is disclosed.
As such, there is no indication in the specification that the inventors had possession of the method of claim 21, wherein the configuring the beamforming operation further comprises querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, wherein the beamforming operation is adjusted based on inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, and wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data.
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 1-30 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.
As per Claim 1, the claim recites “one or more data modeling elements within a computing environment that includes one or more processors and at least one computer-readable non-transitory storage medium having program instructions stored therein which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to execute a model that analyzes one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics relative to an item of agricultural interest from information collected by the phased antenna array, by”.
It is unclear what the “model” is, and it is unclear if the “model” is the “program instructions” or included in the “program instructions”, or is something else.
Additionally, it is unclear how the “model” can perform the function of “analyzes one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics relative to an item of agricultural interest from information collected by the phased antenna array”, as the “model” is not defined in terms of structure that can perform this function.
Furthermore, the limitation “one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics relative to an item of agricultural interest” is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear what is meant by “relative to”, as it is unclear if “relative to” implies that the “one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics” are in fact not characteristics of the “item of agricultural interest” itself and are characteristics that are somehow “relative to” or not directly related to the “item of agricultural interest”
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Furthermore as per Claim 1, the claim recites “wherein the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, phase shifted, and summarized to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms”.
The limitation “summarized” is unclear, as it is unclear what process is required by “summarized”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 7, the claim recites “The system of claim 1, further comprising adjusting the beamforming operation, by determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates an orientation of agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data, and wherein an inertial measurement unit is queried to determine the orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to a beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll”.
It is unclear exactly how the “inertial measurement unit data” is used to calculate “a mounting angle of the phased antenna array” relative to “one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest”.
Furthermore, it is unclear if the “mounting angle” is or is not used for the “beamforming operation”, as the claim recites calculating the “mounting angle”, but does not recite actually using the “mounting angle”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 9, it is unclear how the “model” can perform the function of “issues one or more instructions to automatically position and control the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics”, as the “model” is not defined in terms of structure that can perform this function.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 10, it is unclear how the “model” can perform the function of “issues one or more instructions to [32] automatically position and control an implement of the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant, and soil characteristics”, as the “model” is not defined in terms of structure that can perform this function.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 11, the claim recites “ingesting input data comprised of sensor data collected by a phased antenna array and representing one or more plant, crop, or soil characteristics relative to an item of agricultural interest; modeling the input data in a plurality of data processing elements configured to measure the one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics and analyze the item of agricultural interest, by”.
It is unclear what steps are required by the limitation “modeling the input data in a plurality of data processing elements configured to measure the one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics and analyze the item of agricultural interest”, as the limitations following this limitation do not recite any “modeling” and do not recite any “data processing elements”. As a result, the limitations that follow this limitation do not appear to be related to this “modeling”.
Furthermore, the use of “by:” in the claim appears to indicate that the limitations following the colon directly limit the “modeling”, however, as mentioned above, the claim does not recite any “modeling” or any “data processing elements” following this colon, making it unclear how the “modeling” relates to the other claim limitations.
Furthermore, the limitation “one or more plant, crop, or soil characteristics relative to an item of agricultural interest” is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear what is meant by “relative to”, as it is unclear if “relative to” implies that the “one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics” are in fact not characteristics of the “item of agricultural interest” itself and are characteristics that are somehow “relative to” or not directly related to the “item of agricultural interest”
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Furthermore as per Claim 11, the claim recites “wherein the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, phase shifted, and summarized to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms”.
The limitation “summarized” is unclear, as it is unclear what process is required by “summarized”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 17, the claim recites “The method of claim 11, further comprising adjusting the beamforming operation, by querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, and determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data”.
It is unclear exactly how the “inertial measurement unit data” is used to calculate “a mounting angle of the phased antenna array” relative to “one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest”.
Furthermore, it is unclear if the “mounting angle” is or is not used for the “beamforming operation”, as the claim recites calculating the “mounting angle”, but does not recite actually using the “mounting angle”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 21, the limitation “A method, comprising: configuring a beamforming operation, by identifying one or more beam scan angles for a phased antenna array configured with agricultural machinery” is unclear, as the claim does not recite any configuration of a “beamforming operation”. The step of “identifying one or more beam scan angles for a phased antenna array configured with agricultural machinery” is a step of “identifying”, and there is nothing in the claim that directly links this “identifying” to a step of “configuring a beamforming operation”, making it unclear how or if the “identifying” step relates to “configuring a beamforming operation”. No other mention of “beamforming” is provided in the claim, making it unclear exactly what steps of the claim result in “configuring a beamforming operation” and how such a configuring occurs.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Furthermore as per Claim 21, the claim recites “the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, phase shifted, and summarized to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms”.
The limitation “summarized” is unclear, as it is unclear what process is required by “summarized”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 27, the claim recites “The method of claim 21, wherein the configuring the beamforming operation further comprises querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, wherein the beamforming operation is adjusted based on inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, and wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data”.
It is unclear exactly how the “inertial measurement unit data” is used to calculate “a mounting angle of the phased antenna array” relative to “one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest”.
Furthermore, it is unclear if the “mounting angle” is or is not used for the “beamforming operation”, as the claim recites calculating the “mounting angle”, but does not recite actually using the “mounting angle”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 8-11, 18-21 and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ferrari et al. (2020/0196527).
Examiner’s Note:
Regarding Claim 1, the limitations “to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms”, “to create a measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics of the item of agricultural interest relative to the phased antenna array” and “to execute an agricultural activity for the item of agricultural interest” are each directed to an intended use that does not further limit the claim, as seen by the use of “to” and “for” in the claim.
Regarding Claim 1, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed system, comprising:
a phased antenna array (see P[0078]);
one or more data modeling elements within a computing environment that includes one or more processors and at least one computer-readable non-transitory storage medium having program instructions stored therein which, when executed by the one or more processors (see P[0021]), cause the one or more processors to execute a model that analyzes one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics relative to an item of agricultural interest from information collected by the phased antenna array, by:
directing a plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves from the phased antenna array at the item of agricultural interest according to one or more beam scan angles identified in a beamforming operation (“The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078]),
receiving one or more radio frequency (RF) waveforms scattered from the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, phase shifted, and summarized to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms (“The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078] and “The controller can associate the received-imaging-signals as associated with either the ground or the swath based on their correlation (for instance in terms of one or more of distance/power/phase) with received-imaging-signals received in other directions. Then, if the sensor-data also includes a received-imaging-signal 527 that is not sufficiently correlated with the swath-profile-data or the ground-profile-data, then the controller may determine that the received-imaging-signal 527 is associated with a foreign object”, see P[0062]), and
transforming the information collected by the phased antenna array in the RF energy scattered from the item of agricultural interest from a horizontal angle, a vertical angle, and a distance-to-target into x, y, and z coordinates, to create a measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics of the item of agricultural interest relative to the phased antenna array (“…three-dimensional beamforming-sensors”, see P[0041] and “…where a three-dimensional beamforming-radar-sensor is used, the swath-profile-data and the ground-profile data can be representative of three-dimensional profiles, and the controller can process the swath-profile-data and the ground-profile-data in order to determine swath-volume-data, which is representative of a volume of the swath”, see P[0060]),
wherein agricultural machinery with which the phased antenna array is configured is actuated to execute an agricultural activity for the item of agricultural interest based on the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“The vehicle-control-instructions 628 can include vehicle-steering-instructions for automatically controlling the direction of travel of the agricultural machine 630. In this way, if the controller 614 determines that the agricultural machine 630 is not centralised on the swath (for example by identifying an offset between (i) the lateral centre of the swath, as defined by swath-centre-data for example, and (ii) the lateral centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630), then the controller 614 can provide vehicle-control-instructions 628 that cause the steering of the agricultural machine 630 to be adjusted in order to centralise the agricultural vehicle 630 with reference to the swath (for example to reduce the offset). In some examples, the controller 614 can determine the centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630 and/or the offset, by utilising a known relationship between the field of view of the beamforming-sensor 610 and the centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630”, see P[0069]).
Regarding Claim 8, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed system of claim 1, wherein one or more of a crop yield estimate and an actual crop yield is generated for the item of agricultural interest based on the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“…the controller 614 can determine crop-area-data or crop-volume-data (as the swath-property-data 616)…”, see P[0071]).
Regarding Claim 9, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed system of claim 1, wherein the model issues one or more instructions to automatically position and control the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“The vehicle-control-instructions 628 can also or alternatively include vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically controlling the speed of the agricultural machine 630. For instance, the controller 614 can determine crop-area-data or crop-volume-data (as the swath-property-data 616) and provide vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data. In one example, the controller 614 can provide vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically increasing the speed of the agricultural machine 630 when the sensor-data 612 is representative of a decreasing value for the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data, and vice versa. In some examples, the controller 614 can apply an algorithm to the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data in order to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions. In other examples, the controller 614 can use a database or look-up-table to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data”, see P[0071]).
Regarding Claim 10, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed system of claim 1, wherein the model issues one or more instructions to automatically position and control an implement of the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant, and soil characteristics (“…the vehicle-pick-up-instructions may automatically control a pick-up/header such that it is raised (or the agricultural vehicle 630 is otherwise put in a non-pick-up-mode) in advance of the detected foreign object; and subsequently lowered (or the agricultural vehicle 630 is otherwise placed in a pick-up-mode) after the detected foreign object”, see P[0074]).
Examiner’s Note:
Regarding Claim 11, the limitations “to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms”, “to create a measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics of the item of agricultural interest relative to the phased antenna array” and “to execute an agricultural activity for the item of agricultural interest” are each directed to an intended use that does not further limit the claim, as seen by the use of “to” and “for” in the claim.
Regarding Claim 11, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method, comprising:
ingesting input data comprised of sensor data collected by a phased antenna array and representing one or more plant, crop, or soil characteristics relative to an item of agricultural interest (see P[0078]);
modeling the input data in a plurality of data processing elements configured to measure the one or more plant, crop, and soil characteristics and analyze the item of agricultural interest, by:
directing a plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves from the phased antenna array at the item of agricultural interest according to one or more beam scan angles identified in a beamforming operation (“The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078]),
receiving one or more radio frequency (RF) waveforms scattered from the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, phase shifted, and summarized to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms (“The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078] and “The controller can associate the received-imaging-signals as associated with either the ground or the swath based on their correlation (for instance in terms of one or more of distance/power/phase) with received-imaging-signals received in other directions. Then, if the sensor-data also includes a received-imaging-signal 527 that is not sufficiently correlated with the swath-profile-data or the ground-profile-data, then the controller may determine that the received-imaging-signal 527 is associated with a foreign object”, see P[0062]), and
transforming the information collected by the phased antenna array in the RF energy scattered from the item of agricultural interest from a horizontal angle, a vertical angle, and a distance-to-target into x, y, and z coordinates, to create a measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics of the item of agricultural interest relative to the phased antenna array (“…three-dimensional beamforming-sensors”, see P[0041] and “…where a three-dimensional beamforming-radar-sensor is used, the swath-profile-data and the ground-profile data can be representative of three-dimensional profiles, and the controller can process the swath-profile-data and the ground-profile-data in order to determine swath-volume-data, which is representative of a volume of the swath”, see P[0060]); and
actuating agricultural machinery to execute an agricultural activity for the item of agricultural interest based on the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“The vehicle-control-instructions 628 can include vehicle-steering-instructions for automatically controlling the direction of travel of the agricultural machine 630. In this way, if the controller 614 determines that the agricultural machine 630 is not centralised on the swath (for example by identifying an offset between (i) the lateral centre of the swath, as defined by swath-centre-data for example, and (ii) the lateral centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630), then the controller 614 can provide vehicle-control-instructions 628 that cause the steering of the agricultural machine 630 to be adjusted in order to centralise the agricultural vehicle 630 with reference to the swath (for example to reduce the offset). In some examples, the controller 614 can determine the centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630 and/or the offset, by utilising a known relationship between the field of view of the beamforming-sensor 610 and the centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630”, see P[0069]).
Regarding Claim 18, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 11, wherein one or more of a crop yield estimate and an actual crop yield is generated for the item of agricultural interest based on the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“The vehicle-control-instructions 628 can also or alternatively include vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically controlling the speed of the agricultural machine 630. For instance, the controller 614 can determine crop-area-data or crop-volume-data (as the swath-property-data 616) and provide vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data. In one example, the controller 614 can provide vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically increasing the speed of the agricultural machine 630 when the sensor-data 612 is representative of a decreasing value for the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data, and vice versa. In some examples, the controller 614 can apply an algorithm to the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data in order to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions. In other examples, the controller 614 can use a database or look-up-table to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data”, see P[0071]).
Regarding Claim 19, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 11, wherein the actuating the agricultural machinery further comprises issuing one or more instructions to automatically position and control the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“The vehicle-control-instructions 628 can also or alternatively include vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically controlling the speed of the agricultural machine 630. For instance, the controller 614 can determine crop-area-data or crop-volume-data (as the swath-property-data 616) and provide vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data. In one example, the controller 614 can provide vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically increasing the speed of the agricultural machine 630 when the sensor-data 612 is representative of a decreasing value for the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data, and vice versa. In some examples, the controller 614 can apply an algorithm to the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data in order to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions. In other examples, the controller 614 can use a database or look-up-table to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data”, see P[0071]).
Regarding Claim 20, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 11, wherein the actuating the agricultural machinery further comprises issuing one or more instructions to automatically position and control an implement of the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“…the vehicle-pick-up-instructions may automatically control a pick-up/header such that it is raised (or the agricultural vehicle 630 is otherwise put in a non-pick-up-mode) in advance of the detected foreign object; and subsequently lowered (or the agricultural vehicle 630 is otherwise placed in a pick-up-mode) after the detected foreign object”, see P[0074]).
Examiner’s Note:
Regarding Claim 21, the limitations “to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms”, “to create a measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics of the item of agricultural interest relative to the phased antenna array” and “to execute an agricultural activity for the item of agricultural interest” are each directed to an intended use that does not further limit the claim, as seen by the use of “to” and “for” in the claim.
Regarding Claim 21, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method, comprising:
configuring a beamforming operation, by identifying one or more beam scan angles for a phased antenna array configured with agricultural machinery (“The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078]);
capturing sensor data from the phased antenna array, by transmitting a plurality of beams of radio waves from the phased antenna array at the item of agricultural interest according to the one or more beam scan angles (“The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078]), and receiving one or more radio frequency (RF) waveforms scattered from the item of agricultural interest, wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are phase shifted, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, phase shifted, and summarized to reinforce selected waveforms from particular directions while attenuating other non-selected waveforms (“The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078] and “The controller can associate the received-imaging-signals as associated with either the ground or the swath based on their correlation (for instance in terms of one or more of distance/power/phase) with received-imaging-signals received in other directions. Then, if the sensor-data also includes a received-imaging-signal 527 that is not sufficiently correlated with the swath-profile-data or the ground-profile-data, then the controller may determine that the received-imaging-signal 527 is associated with a foreign object”, see P[0062]);
transforming the sensor data from a horizontal angle, a vertical angle, and a distance- to-target into x, y, and z coordinates, to create a measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics of the item of agricultural interest relative to the phased antenna array (“…three-dimensional beamforming-sensors”, see P[0041] and “…where a three-dimensional beamforming-radar-sensor is used, the swath-profile-data and the ground-profile data can be representative of three-dimensional profiles, and the controller can process the swath-profile-data and the ground-profile-data in order to determine swath-volume-data, which is representative of a volume of the swath”, see P[0060]); and
instructing the agricultural machinery to execute an agricultural activity for the item of agricultural interest based on the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“The vehicle-control-instructions 628 can include vehicle-steering-instructions for automatically controlling the direction of travel of the agricultural machine 630. In this way, if the controller 614 determines that the agricultural machine 630 is not centralised on the swath (for example by identifying an offset between (i) the lateral centre of the swath, as defined by swath-centre-data for example, and (ii) the lateral centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630), then the controller 614 can provide vehicle-control-instructions 628 that cause the steering of the agricultural machine 630 to be adjusted in order to centralise the agricultural vehicle 630 with reference to the swath (for example to reduce the offset). In some examples, the controller 614 can determine the centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630 and/or the offset, by utilising a known relationship between the field of view of the beamforming-sensor 610 and the centre of a pick-up/header of the agricultural machine 630”, see P[0069]).
Regarding Claim 28, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 21, further comprising generating one or more of a crop yield estimate and an actual crop yield is generated for the item of agricultural interest based on the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“…the controller 614 can determine crop-area-data or crop-volume-data (as the swath-property-data 616)…”, see P[0071]).
Regarding Claim 29, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the instructing the agricultural machinery further comprises issuing one or more instructions to automatically position and control the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“The vehicle-control-instructions 628 can also or alternatively include vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically controlling the speed of the agricultural machine 630. For instance, the controller 614 can determine crop-area-data or crop-volume-data (as the swath-property-data 616) and provide vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data. In one example, the controller 614 can provide vehicle-speed-instructions for automatically increasing the speed of the agricultural machine 630 when the sensor-data 612 is representative of a decreasing value for the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data, and vice versa. In some examples, the controller 614 can apply an algorithm to the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data in order to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions. In other examples, the controller 614 can use a database or look-up-table to determine the vehicle-speed-instructions based on the crop-area-data or crop-volume-data”, see P[0071]).
Regarding Claim 30, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the instructing the agricultural machinery further comprises issuing one or more instructions to automatically position and control an implement of the agricultural machinery to execute the agricultural activity in response to the measurement of the one or more crop, plant and soil characteristics (“…the vehicle-pick-up-instructions may automatically control a pick-up/header such that it is raised (or the agricultural vehicle 630 is otherwise put in a non-pick-up-mode) in advance of the detected foreign object; and subsequently lowered (or the agricultural vehicle 630 is otherwise placed in a pick-up-mode) after the detected foreign object”, see P[0074]).
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 2, 12, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferrari et al. (2020/0196527) in view of Yang et al. (10,649,067).
Regarding Claim 2, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of phase shifted beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array…(“The phased-array-radar-sensor 710 is associated with an agricultural vehicle, which in this example is a tractor 730. The phased-array-radar-sensor 710 includes a plurality of antennae, that: (i) transmit signals are phase-shifted with respect to each other before being provided to the transmit-antennae, such that overall they constructively combine in a particular direction; and/or (ii) received signals are phase-shifted with respect to each other, such that overall they constructively combine in a particular direction. The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078]).
Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
wherein the plurality of phase shifted beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through an analog phase shifter for each antenna.
However, Yang et al. (10,649,067) teaches converting phase-shifted signals to analog signals for transmissions (Yang et al.; see col.5, particularly lines 43-53) and analog canceller phase shifters applying phase shifts to received signals (Yang et al.; see col.6, particularly lines 30-42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Yang et al., and wherein the plurality of phase shifted beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through an analog phase shifter for each antenna, as rendered obvious by Yang et al., in order to provide for “self-interference cancellation and external noise cancellation” (Yang et al.; see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 12, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 11, wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array…(“The phased-array-radar-sensor 710 is associated with an agricultural vehicle, which in this example is a tractor 730. The phased-array-radar-sensor 710 includes a plurality of antennae, that: (i) transmit signals are phase-shifted with respect to each other before being provided to the transmit-antennae, such that overall they constructively combine in a particular direction; and/or (ii) received signals are phase-shifted with respect to each other, such that overall they constructively combine in a particular direction. The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078]).
Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through an analog phase shifter for each antenna.
However, Yang et al. (10,649,067) teaches converting phase-shifted signals to analog signals for transmissions (Yang et al.; see col.5, particularly lines 43-53) and analog canceller phase shifters applying phase shifts to received signals (Yang et al.; see col.6, particularly lines 30-42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Yang et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through an analog phase shifter for each antenna, as rendered obvious by Yang et al., in order to provide for “self-interference cancellation and external noise cancellation” (Yang et al.; see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 22, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through an analog phase shifter for each antenna…(“The phased-array-radar-sensor 710 is associated with an agricultural vehicle, which in this example is a tractor 730. The phased-array-radar-sensor 710 includes a plurality of antennae, that: (i) transmit signals are phase-shifted with respect to each other before being provided to the transmit-antennae, such that overall they constructively combine in a particular direction; and/or (ii) received signals are phase-shifted with respect to each other, such that overall they constructively combine in a particular direction. The phase shift of the transmit and/or receive signals are controlled by a controller 714 such that a particular direction of θ is achieved”, see P[0078]).
Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through an analog phase shifter for each antenna.
However, Yang et al. (10,649,067) teaches converting phase-shifted signals to analog signals for transmissions (Yang et al.; see col.5, particularly lines 43-53) and analog canceller phase shifters applying phase shifts to received signals (Yang et al.; see col.6, particularly lines 30-42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Yang et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through an analog phase shifter for each antenna, as rendered obvious by Yang et al., in order to provide for “self-interference cancellation and external noise cancellation” (Yang et al.; see Abstract).
Claims 3, 4, 13, 14, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferrari et al. (2020/0196527) in view of Loui et al. (9,479,232).
Regarding Claim 3, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array (see P[0078]), and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array (see P[0078]).
Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through a true time delay unit for each antenna.
However, Loui et al. (9,479,232) teaches an array antenna configured to enable true-time-delay (TTD) electronic beam steering on transmit and receive (Loui et al.; see col.4, particularly lines 15-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Loui et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through a true time delay unit for each antenna, as rendered obvious by Loui et al., in order to “perform beam steering on both transmit and receive utilizing inexpensive componentry” (Loui et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 13-29).
Regarding Claim 4, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are transmitted within an x-band of the RF spectrum.
However, Loui et al. (9,479,232) teaches an antenna system that can generate x-band signals (Loui et al.; see col.6, particularly lines 64-67 and col.7, particularly lines 1-7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Loui et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are transmitted within an x-band of the RF spectrum, as rendered obvious by Loui et al., in order to “perform beam steering on both transmit and receive utilizing inexpensive componentry” (Loui et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 13-29).
Regarding Claim 13, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 11, wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array (see P[0078]), and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array…(see P[0078]).
Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through a true time delay unit for each antenna.
However, Loui et al. (9,479,232) teaches an array antenna configured to enable true-time-delay (TTD) electronic beam steering on transmit and receive (Loui et al.; see col.4, particularly lines 15-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Loui et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through a true time delay unit for each antenna, as rendered obvious by Loui et al., in order to “perform beam steering on both transmit and receive utilizing inexpensive componentry” (Loui et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 13-29).
Regarding Claim 14, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 11, wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are transmitted within an x-band of the RF spectrum.
However, Loui et al. (9,479,232) teaches an antenna system that can generate x-band signals (Loui et al.; see col.6, particularly lines 64-67 and col.7, particularly lines 1-7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Loui et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of phase shifted radio waves are transmitted within an x-band of the RF spectrum, as rendered obvious by Loui et al., in order to “perform beam steering on both transmit and receive utilizing inexpensive componentry” (Loui et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 13-29).
Regarding Claim 23, Ferrari et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array (see P[0078]), and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array…(see P[0078]).
Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through a true time delay unit for each antenna.
However, Loui et al. (9,479,232) teaches an array antenna configured to enable true-time-delay (TTD) electronic beam steering on transmit and receive (Loui et al.; see col.4, particularly lines 15-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Loui et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are emitted from the phased antenna array, and the one or more RF waveforms are received by the phased antenna array, through a true time delay unit for each antenna, as rendered obvious by Loui et al., in order to “perform beam steering on both transmit and receive utilizing inexpensive componentry” (Loui et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 13-29).
Regarding Claim 24, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are transmitted within an x-band of the RF spectrum.
However, Loui et al. (9,479,232) teaches an antenna system that can generate x-band signals (Loui et al.; see col.6, particularly lines 64-67 and col.7, particularly lines 1-7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Loui et al., and wherein the plurality of beams of radio waves are transmitted within an x-band of the RF spectrum, as rendered obvious by Loui et al., in order to “perform beam steering on both transmit and receive utilizing inexpensive componentry” (Loui et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 13-29).
Claims 5, 15 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferrari et al. (2020/0196527) in view of Emadi et al. (2023/0176184).
Regarding Claim 5, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed system of claim 1, further comprising a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information relative to the item of agricultural interest.
However, Emadi et al. (2023/0176184) a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information of a target (Emadi et al.; see Claim 1 and P[0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Emadi et al., and the system of claim 1, further comprising a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, as rendered obvious by Emadi et al., in order to determine “a range of the target” (Emadi et al.; see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 15, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 11, wherein the input data further includes sensor data from a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information relative to the item of agricultural interest.
However, Emadi et al. (2023/0176184) a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information of a target (Emadi et al.; see Claim 1 and P[0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Emadi et al., and wherein the input data further includes sensor data from a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, as rendered obvious by Emadi et al., in order to determine “a range of the target” (Emadi et al.; see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 25, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the capturing sensor data further comprises capturing data from a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information relative to the item of agricultural interest.
However, Emadi et al. (2023/0176184) a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information of a target (Emadi et al.; see Claim 1 and P[0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Emadi et al., and wherein the capturing sensor data further comprises capturing data from a frequency modulated continuous wave radar sensor that collects the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, as rendered obvious by Emadi et al., in order to determine “a range of the target” (Emadi et al.; see Abstract).
Claims 6, 16 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferrari et al. (2020/0196527) in view of Kemmer et al. (2018/0188366).
Regarding Claim 6, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed system of claim 1, further comprising one or more additional sensing systems that collect the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more additional sensing systems including at least one of a vision- based imaging system, a light detection and ranging sensor (Lidar), an acoustic sensor, and a sonic sensor.
However, Kemmer et al. (2018/0188366) teaches a LIDAR sensor used in combination with a radar sensor (Kemmer et al.; see P[0014]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Kemmer et al., and the system of claim 1, further comprising one or more additional sensing systems that collect the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more additional sensing systems including at least one of a vision- based imaging system, a light detection and ranging sensor (Lidar), an acoustic sensor, and a sonic sensor, as rendered obvious by Kemmer et al., in order to “determine the profile of a swath or windrow as a machine (e.g., agricultural machine) traverses a field” (Kemmer et al.; see P[0010]).
Regarding Claim 16, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 11, wherein the input data further includes sensor data from one or more additional sensing systems that collect the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more additional sensing systems including at least one of a vision-based imaging system, a light detection and ranging sensor (Lidar), an acoustic sensor, and a sonic sensor.
However, Kemmer et al. (2018/0188366) teaches a LIDAR sensor used in combination with a radar sensor (Kemmer et al.; see P[0014]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Kemmer et al., and wherein the input data further includes sensor data from one or more additional sensing systems that collect the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more additional sensing systems including at least one of a vision-based imaging system, a light detection and ranging sensor (Lidar), an acoustic sensor, and a sonic sensor, as rendered obvious by Kemmer et al., in order to “determine the profile of a swath or windrow as a machine (e.g., agricultural machine) traverses a field” (Kemmer et al.; see P[0010]).
Regarding Claim 26, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the capturing sensor data further includes capturing data from one or more additional sensing systems that collect the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more additional sensing systems including at least one of a vision-based imaging system, a light detection and ranging sensor (Lidar), an acoustic sensor, and a sonic sensor.
However, Kemmer et al. (2018/0188366) teaches a LIDAR sensor used in combination with a radar sensor (Kemmer et al.; see P[0014]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Kemmer et al., and wherein the capturing sensor data further includes capturing data from one or more additional sensing systems that collect the information relative to the item of agricultural interest, wherein the one or more additional sensing systems including at least one of a vision-based imaging system, a light detection and ranging sensor (Lidar), an acoustic sensor, and a sonic sensor, as rendered obvious by Kemmer et al., in order to “determine the profile of a swath or windrow as a machine (e.g., agricultural machine) traverses a field” (Kemmer et al.; see P[0010]).
Claims 7, 17 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferrari et al. (2020/0196527) in view of Kurono et al. (2014/0062762) further in view of Lok et al. (2011/0309972).
Regarding Claim 7, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed system of claim 1, further comprising adjusting the beamforming operation, by determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates an orientation of agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data, and wherein an inertial measurement unit is queried to determine the orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to a beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll.
However, Kurono et al. (2014/0062762) teaches determining a height of a target from a ground surface based on a radar mounting height and an angle difference based on the ground surface (Kurono et al.; see P[0081]-P[0084]).
Furthermore, Lok et al. (2011/0309972) teaches a beam steering generator that may steer a beam in a particular direction, and which compensates for changes in radar antenna system platform changes in roll, pitch and yaw angles indicated by an IMU (Lok et al.; see P[0038]-P[0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Kurono et al. and Lok et al., and adjusting the beamforming operation, by determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates an orientation of agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data, and wherein an inertial measurement unit is queried to determine the orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to a beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, as rendered obvious by Kurono et al. and Lok et al., in order to calculate “a height of the target from the ground surface” (Kurono et al.; see Abstract), and in order to utilize “roll, pitch and yaw angle motion compensations” and in order to “steer the beam maximum of an antenna electric field pattern to some predefined point in space” (Lok et al.; see P[0007]).
Regarding Claim 17, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 11, further comprising adjusting the beamforming operation, by querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, and determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data.
However, Kurono et al. (2014/0062762) teaches determining a height of a target from a ground surface based on a radar mounting height and an angle difference based on the ground surface (Kurono et al.; see P[0081]-P[0084]).
Furthermore, Lok et al. (2011/0309972) teaches a beam steering generator that may steer a beam in a particular direction, and which compensates for changes in radar antenna system platform changes in roll, pitch and yaw angles indicated by an IMU (Lok et al.; see P[0038]-P[0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Kurono et al. and Lok et al., and adjusting the beamforming operation, by querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, and determining the one or more beam scan angles for the phased antenna array from inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data, as rendered obvious by Kurono et al. and Lok et al., in order to calculate “a height of the target from the ground surface” (Kurono et al.; see Abstract), and in order to utilize “roll, pitch and yaw angle motion compensations” and in order to “steer the beam maximum of an antenna electric field pattern to some predefined point in space” (Lok et al.; see P[0007]).
Regarding Claim 27, Ferrari et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 21, wherein the configuring the beamforming operation further comprises querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, wherein the beamforming operation is adjusted based on inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, and wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data.
However, Kurono et al. (2014/0062762) teaches determining a height of a target from a ground surface based on a radar mounting height and an angle difference based on the ground surface (Kurono et al.; see P[0081]-P[0084]).
Furthermore, Lok et al. (2011/0309972) teaches a beam steering generator that may steer a beam in a particular direction, and which compensates for changes in radar antenna system platform changes in roll, pitch and yaw angles indicated by an IMU (Lok et al.; see P[0038]-P[0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ferrari et al. with the teachings of Kurono et al. and Lok et al., and wherein the configuring the beamforming operation further comprises querying an inertial measurement unit to determine an orientation of the agricultural machinery relative to the ground surface prior to the beamforming operation, the orientation of the agricultural machinery at least represented by a pitch and a roll, wherein the beamforming operation is adjusted based on inertial measurement unit data that indicates the orientation of the agricultural machinery on which the phased antenna array is configured, and wherein a mounting angle of the phased antenna array is calculated relative to one or both of a ground surface and the item of agricultural interest from the inertial measurement unit data, as rendered obvious by Kurono et al. and Lok et al., in order to calculate “a height of the target from the ground surface” (Kurono et al.; see Abstract), and in order to utilize “roll, pitch and yaw angle motion compensations” and in order to “steer the beam maximum of an antenna electric field pattern to some predefined point in space” (Lok et al.; see P[0007]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISAAC G SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-9593. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8AM-5PM.
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, ANISS CHAD can be reached at 571-270-3832. 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.
/ISAAC G SMITH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662