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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Two reference numerals, “120” and “126”, have been used to refer to a “floating frame” (see the penultimate line of para. [0037] and line 1 of para. [0038]);
Reference numeral “132” has been used to refer to a dirt flap (para. [0036], line 5), closing wheels (para. [0036], line 8), a sword assembly (the final line of para. [0037]), and one or more wheels (para. [0039], line 4).
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because reference numeral “138” in Fig. 1 does not appear to point to a closing wheel assembly as established in the final two lines of para. [0037]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: dirt flap “144”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because reference numeral “190” in Fig. 1 does not appear to point to a singulation unit/assembly as established in line 2 of para. [0032]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "126" and "136" in Fig. 1 have both been used to designate what is possibly a sword furrow opener. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because reference numeral “126” in Fig. 1 does not appear to point to a floating frame as established in line 1 of para. [0038]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because reference number “142” in Fig. 1 is used to point to a “sword” in the specification but this part does not appear to comprise a sword (described as a sword disk or furrow disk, etc. in para. [0038]). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “the sword assembly” should be changed to –a sword assembly—because this is the first time this assembly has been set forth. 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.
Claim 13 is 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 requires wherein the sensors are configured to provide a signal to the controller based on “at least one angle of rotation in relation to the ground and the planter”. This wording is awkward and unclear. For purposes of examination, the angle of rotation is that created within the sensor(s) by movement over undulations in the field.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10, 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kinoshita et al. 5,402,740.
Independent Claims 1, 14: Kinoshita discloses an automated slip transplanter (1) used by a method for automated transplanting as per claim 14, the transplanter comprising:
a planter unit (5) configured to receive and plant slips (vegetal seedlings);
a conveyor belt (77, Fig. 8) operably coupled to the planter unit, wherein the conveyor belt is configured to transfer the slips towards the planter unit; and
a controller (152) configured to control the planter unit and utilize one or more operational modes (see col. 13, lns. 1-14, modes: “operative”, “inoperative”, “ground surface followup control” described in col. 13, lns. 15-38 and “absolute horizontal control” described in col. 13, ln. 39-47 and/or automatic mode controlling the relationship of the PTO shaft and the seedling interval setting unit as described in col. 7, ln. 67-col. 8, ln. 20) for planting a plurality of rows of slips (across planting devices 65 as seen in Fig. 2), wherein each of the plurality of rows of slips includes evenly spaced slips in the ground (col. 8, lns. 8-20), as per claims 1 and 14.
Dependent Claims 2-8, 10, 13, 15-20: Kinoshita further discloses wherein the controller (152) is further configured to implement the one or more operational modes (“ground surface followup control” mode described in col. 13, lns. 15-38) to dynamically adjust a planting depth of the planter unit (5, see specifically col. 13, lns. 36-38), as per claims 2, 15;
wherein the one or more operational modes include an active depth control planting mode (“ground surface followup control” mode described in col. 13, lns. 15-38, see specifically lines 36-38), an active node control planting mode (automatic mode described in col. 7, ln. 67-col. 8, ln. 20), an active angle control planting mode (pitch and roll, see mode described in col. 12, lns. 5-31), an active node counts control planting mode (automatic mode described in col. 7, ln. 67-col. 8, ln. 20), and an active slip rate control planting mode (automatic mode described in col. 7, ln. 67-col. 8, ln. 20), as per claims 3, 16;
wherein the planter unit (5) further includes one or more sensors (120, 121) communicatively coupled to the controller (152), wherein the one or more sensors include a depth sensor, a motion sensor (pitch and roll movement, see col. 12, lns. 5-31), a photoelectric sensor, an optical encoder, a rotary sensor, and a linear potentiometer sensor, as per claims 4, 17;
wherein the one or more sensors (120, 121) are configured to measure one or more soil properties (undulations of the soil, col. 12, lns. 5-31) and collect one or more planting measurements (roll and pitch angles of the sensors) in real-time as the planter unit (5) traverses the ground of a field, as per claims 5, 18;
wherein the one or more planting measurements (the roll and pitch angles) comprise at least one or more of soil reflectance measurements, predetermined planting properties of the slips, and variable depth measurements between the ground and the planter unit (pitch and roll, see col. 12, lns. 5-31), as per claims 6, 19;
wherein the planter unit (5) further includes a floating frame (68, see col. 9, lns. 11-15), as per claim 7;
a singulation unit (65) vertically disposed on the planter unit (5), the singulation unit having a plurality of automated grippers (111) configured to singularly grasp slips from a plurality of cartridges (79), as per claim 8;
wherein the controller (152) is configured to control the planter unit (5) in real-time (according to signals from sensors 120, 121, which ride over the field creating real-time signals), as per claim 10;
wherein the one or more sensors (120, 121) are configured to provide a signal to the controller (152) based on at least an angle of rotation (the sensor sense pitch and roll of the planter unit created by undulations of the ground, col. 12, lns. 5-31) in relation to the ground and the planter unit (5), as per claim 13;
dynamically adjusting a planting depth of a sword (112) by actively controlling a depth of operation of the sword (see “ground surface followup control” mode described in col. 13, lns. 15-38 and specifically lines 36-38), as per claim 20.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kinoshita et al. in view of Gould, Jr. 1,376,933.
Dependent Claim 9: The transplanter is disclosed as applied above. However, Kinoshita fails to disclose wherein the conveyor belt comprises a belt with a plurality of brushed holders configured to receive the slips, as per claim 9.
Gould discloses a similar transplanter wherein the conveyor belt (11 or 12) comprises a belt (11, 12) with a plurality of brushed holders (bristles, as seen in Fig. 4) configured to receive the slips (plants), as per claim 9.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the brushed holders of Gould on the conveyor belt of Kinoshita in order to gently hold and maintain plants and their roots in an optimized orientation for planting.
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kinoshita et al. in view of Post 10,412,874.
Dependent Claims 11-12: The transplanter is disclosed as applied above. Kinoshita further discloses wherein the planter unit (5) further includes a sword (133), a furrow sword opener (133), and a closing wheels assembly (66), and wherein the planter unit is supported by one or more closing wheels (66) of the closing wheel assembly and the sword (133), as per claim 11;
wherein the controller (152) is further configured to dynamically adjust a planting depth of the sword assembly by actively controlling a depth of operation of the sword (133), the furrow sword opener (112), and the closing wheels (66, see “ground surface followup control” mode described in col. 13, lns. 15-38 and specifically lines 36-38), as per claim 12.
However, Kinoshita fails to disclose wherein the planter unit further includes a dirt flap, as per claim 11.
Post discloses a similar planter wherein the planter unit (2) further includes a dirt flap (9, col. 5, lns. 27-34), as per claim 11.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the dirt flaps of Post on the transplanter of Kinoshita in order to limit soil and debris dispersion created by the soil working tools.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached PTOL-892. Simatovic US 2019/0327917 A1 was cited as an X reference in the PCT Written Opinion 237, however, for purposes of examination it was found that Kinoshita et al. more comprehensively read on the dependent claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alicia M. Torres whose telephone number is 571-272-6997. The examiner’s fax number is 571-273-6997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph M. Rocca, can be reached at (571) 272-8971.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the group receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-3600. The fax number for this Group is 571-273-8300.
/Alicia Torres/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 July 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights