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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 7,9, and 10 have been newly amended. No claims have been newly added nor canceled. Claims 1-10 remain pending in the present application. The previous claim objections to claims 1, 7, 9 and 10 have been withdrawn as a result of amendment. Further, the previous 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection of claim 9 has been withdrawn as a result of amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1, 9, and 10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant asserts that Hiromasa fails to disclose the limitations of newly amended claim 1. Applicant argues that Hiromasa fails to disclose at least the limitation of "causing, based upon detection of a non-work area, the work vehicle to automatically travel in the non-work area in a case where a predetermined confirmation operation or a confirmation action by a worker is performed, wherein automatic travel in the non-work area is disabled until the predetermined confirmation operation or the confirmation action is performed." Specifically, Applicant argues that:
Hiromasa recites that "inter-field movement control mode 36 is a function of controlling an operation when each of the plurality of tractors 10 moves between fields by automatic traveling from the field … on which the tractor 10 has performed the automatic work to the field … on which the tractor 10 is scheduled to perform the next work." Hiromasa at ¶0050.
As Hiromasa explains, "inter-field movement control mode can be rephrased as an automatic traveling control mode at the time of inter-field movement … [and that] the automatic operation control unit 34 performs control such that the transition to the inter-field movement control mode [sic] … is performed based on … position information [that] tractor 10 has reached a specific position in the field 9 … [such as] the work end position Pe of the field 9 in which the automatic work has been performed at the time of the shift, and the work start position of the field 9 of the movement destination. Id. at ¶0050-0051. Thus, as outlined above, Hiromasa continues to use automatic travel control by automatically switching to automatic inter-field movement control mode during inter-field movement when the tractor reaches a specific position in the field.
Hiromasa further recites that "[a]s an exception [sic], the transition to the control mode 36 can be performed [sic] by an operation of an operation device such as the remote management operation device 7 as described later." Id. at ¶0051. Hiromasa then explains, in ¶0071, that "the remote management operation device 7 functions to manually and sequentially select and instruct the start of movement between fields of two or more tractors 10 (10B, 10C) that are in a relationship in which there is an overlapping portion Rx between the travel routes Rr when moving between fields and that are temporarily stopped and waiting at the entrance 91 of the field 9.[sic]" Id. at ¶0071.
Thus, in Hiromasa, manual intervention to override automatic control occurs when "there is an overlapping portion Rx between the travel routes Rr [of two or more tractors that are in a relationship] when moving between fields and that are temporarily stopped and waiting at the entrance … of the field." Id. In contrast, in amended independent Claim 1, "a predetermined confirmation operation or a confirmation action by a worker is performed" to enable automatic travel, "based upon detection of a non-work area [sic]" and "automatic travel in the non-work area is disabled until the predetermined confirmation operation or the confirmation action is performed," which Hiromasa fails to disclose. Therefore, amended independent Claim 1 is allowable over Hiromasa.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding Applicant's assertion that Hiromasa "continues to use automatic travel control by automatically switching to automatic inter-field movement control mode during inter-field movement when the tractor reaches a specified position in the field," the examiner notes that while Hiromasa does disclose this, this is not the only means of switching to automatic inter-field movement that Hiromasa discloses. Rather, as Applicant admits, "the transition to the control mode 36 can be performed by an operation of an operation device such as the remote management operation device 7 as described later." Applicants specific emphasizing of "[a]s an exception [sic]" and "can be performed [sic]" are not germane to an analysis under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), because the mere disclosure of an alternative does not render the reference any less anticipatory. Furthermore, Applicant's assertion that "in Hiromasa, manual intervention to override automatic control occurs when 'there is an overlapping portion Rx between the travel routes Rr [of two or more tractors that are in a relationship] when moving between fields and that are temporarily stopped and waiting at the entrance … of the field…'," fails to distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art, because the mere disclosure of a situation in which a tractor is prevented from traveling between working fields until instructed to start inter-field movement (i.e., until … the confirmation action is performed, see at least [0071]) is sufficient to render the claim anticipated. Hence, Applicant's arguments are not persuasive.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 10, Applicant claims: “A traveling control system that controls traveling of a work vehicle capable of automatically traveling, the traveling control method comprising….” The examiner recommends amending this limitation to recite: "A traveling control system that controls traveling of a work vehicle capable of automatically traveling by performing a traveling control method, the traveling control method comprising…"
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hiromasa (JP2022032805A), hereafter Hiromasa.
Regarding claim 1, Hiromasa discloses a traveling control method for controlling traveling of a work vehicle capable of automatically traveling, the traveling control method comprising execution of:
Causing the work vehicle to automatically travel in a work area in a case where the work vehicle satisfies a traveling start condition (0047-0048, the automatic work control mode 35 is a function for controlling the operation of a plurality of tractors 10 when they each perform automatic work in the field 9 where work is scheduled to be performed… In the automatic work control mode 35, the tractor 10 that has entered the field 9 where work is scheduled to be performed is automatically driven within the field 9 in accordance with the work information for the field 9 and the route information within the field 9); and
Causing, based upon detection of a non-work area, the work vehicle to automatically travel in a non-work area in a case where predetermined confirmation operation or confirmation action by a worker is performed (0050-0051, the inter-field movement control mode 36 is a function for controlling the operation when a plurality of tractors 10 move between fields by automatic travel from a field 9 where they have worked automatically to the next field 9 where they are scheduled to work… the transition to the inter-field movement control mode 36 can be performed by operating an operating device such as the remote management operating device, 0054, in the inter-field movement control mode 36, multiple tractors are controlled to automatically travel from the field 9 where they have been automatically worked to the next field 9 where they are scheduled to work, 0064, It is exemplified that the tractors 10A and 10C, which are stopped and waiting at each entrance / exit 91 when moving between fields, are in the state (3), 0065, These states (1) to (5) are classified based on the position information and the like acquired by the information acquisition unit 73 from the plurality of tractors 10.), wherein automatic travel in the non-work area is disabled until the predetermined confirmation operation or the confirmation action is performed (0070-0071, if the remote control operation device 7 has a relationship in which overlapping partial Rx exists between the travel paths Rr when the two or more tractors 10 (10B, 10C) move between fields, the corresponding two or more tractors 10 All of the tractors 10 are temporarily stopped at the entrance / exit 91 of the moving field 9 (9A, 9E) to stand by… Further, in the remote control operation device 7, two or more tractors 10 (10B) that temporarily stop and stand by at the entrance / exit 91 of the field 9 due to the relationship of the overlapping partial Rx between the travel paths Rr when moving between fields. , 10C) has a function to manually select and instruct the start of inter-field movement. As shown in FIG. 2, the function for selecting and instructing is configured as a selection instruction switch (SW) 77c for starting inter-field movement provided in the input device 77.)
Claims 9 and 10 are similar in scope to claim 1, and are similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 2, Hiromasa discloses the traveling control method according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein
In the non-work area, the work vehicle is caused to automatically travel only while the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is being performed (0051, the automatic driving control unit 34 controls the transition to and release from the inter-field movement control mode 36 based on detection information that the position information obtained from the positioning device 61 of the tractor 10 has reached a specific field 9).
Regarding claim 3, Hiromasa discloses the traveling control method according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein
In a case where the work vehicle moves from the work area to the non-work area, a reception screen that receives the confirmation operation from the worker is displayed on an operation terminal (0079, the remote management operation device 7 as described may be used in conjunction with a remote operation terminal 70, as shown by the two dot chain line in Figure 1, which allows a user who operates the tractor 10 to automatically travel and work at a location away from the tractor 10 to perform the required operations by communicating information about the operation of the tractor 10).
Regarding claim 4, Hiromasa discloses the traveling control method according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein
In a case where the work vehicle that is automatically traveling in the non-work area enters a predetermined state, the work vehicle is caused to automatically travel only while the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is being performed (0063, state 4 is a state in which the robot is moving between fields in the inter-field movement control mode 36, and is moving outside the field 9 in an automatic manner).
Regarding claim 5, Hiromasa discloses the traveling control method according to claim 4, and further discloses wherein
The predetermined state is a state in which an obstacle that becomes an obstacle to traveling based on a non-work route preset in the non-work area is detected (0063, state 4 is a state in which the robot is moving between fields in the inter-field movement control mode 36, and is moving outside the field 9 in an automatic manner, state 5 is a state in which an emergency stop is required, such as detection of an obstacle during state 4), or a state in which specific work is required in the work vehicle .
Regarding claim 7, Hiromasa discloses the traveling control method according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein
In the non-work area, an automatic traveling permission area where the automatic traveling of the work vehicle is permitted is set (0054, in the inter-field movement control mode 36, multiple tractors 10 are controlled to automatically travel from the field 9 where they have been automatically worked to the next field 9 where they are scheduled to work, in accordance with route information for traveling between fields, such as the travel route Rm within the field 9 and the travel route Rr on the road 95),
A first work vehicle that enters the automatic traveling permission area is permitted to automatically travel regardless of whether or not there is the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker (0104, when the management control deice 71 receives information that the mode has been switched to inter-field movement control mode 36, it uses this trigger to determine whether two or more tractors 10 have switched to inter-field movement control mode 36, 0105, if it is determined in this step 31 that the number of tractors 10 that have transitioned to inter-field movement control mode 36 is one, the remote management operation device 7 operates the automatic driving control unit 34 of the tractor 10A so that the one tractor 10A that first transitioned to inter-field movement control mode 36 starts moving between fields), and
Second and subsequent work vehicles that enter the automatic traveling permission area is permitted to automatically travel only while the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is being performed (0107, if it is determined in step 31 that two or more tractors 10 have transitioned to inter-field movement control mode 36, it is determined whether there is an overlapping portion Rx between the travel routes Rr of the two or more tractors 10, 0111, if it is determined in step 34 that there is an overlapping portion Rx, a group of tractors having an overlapping portion Rx, a group of tractors having an overlapping portion Rx on their travel route Rr is selected, and then the automatic driving control units 34 of the corresponding tractors are operated so that all of the two or more tractors 10 selected in that group of tractors are controlled to temporarily stop and wait at the entrances/exits of the respective fields 9 from which they are moving, 0114-0115, in this case, the remote monitor selects the desired tractor 10 that he/she wishes to start moving between fields, and sequentially issues instructions to start the movement of the tractor 10 between fields, at this time, when the remote management operation device 7 is selected by the remote monitor as the tractor that will be the first to start moving between fields, it operates the automatic driving control unit 34 of the tractor 10b to control the selected tractor 10 to start moving between fields first, in this case, when tractor 10B is selected and indicated, tractor 10B is released from the temporary suspension and then moves from the source field 9A to field 9B while being controlled by the inter-field movement control mode 36).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiromasa, and further in view of McCutcheon (US 20220174867 A1), hereafter McCutcheon.
Regarding claim 6, Hiromasa discloses the traveling control method according to claim 5, and further discloses wherein:
In a case where the obstacle is detected while the work vehicle is automatically traveling, the work vehicle is stopped (0063, state 4 is a state in which the robot is moving between fields in the inter-field movement control mode 36, and is moving outside the field 9 in an automatic manner, state 5 is a state in which an emergency stop is required, such as detection of an obstacle during state 4).
Hiromasa fails to explicitly teach, however, wherein where the obstacle is detected while the work vehicle is automatically traveling, the work vehicle is stopped temporarily, and then in a case where the obstacle is not detected before the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is performed, the automatic traveling based on the non-work route is resumed.
McCutcheon, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein where the obstacle is detected while the work vehicle is automatically traveling, the work vehicle is stopped temporarily, and then in a case where the obstacle is not detected before the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is performed, the automatic traveling based on the non-work route is resumed (0073-0083, stop for dynamic obstacle steps: 1) a dynamic obstacle, i.e., an obstacle that is moving such as a person or pet) is detected by the navigation process and a pause command is received by the mower controller, 2) all mower autonomy is paused, 3) mower blade controller is instructed to stop the blades as fast as possible, 4) wheel motor controllers are instructed to stop the drive motors as fast as possible, 5) the mower processor instructs the safety controller to engage the brakes when the wheels are near zero velocity, 6) wheel drive motors are idled, … , 10) autonomous control is automatically resumed once the obstacle clears unless the user intervenes before autonomous control resumes).
Hiromasa and McCutcheon are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., autonomous device navigation systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the travel resuming of McCutcheon in order to provide a means of increasing the autonomous capabilities of the work vehicle. The motivation to combine is to allow the work vehicle to operate autonomously in more situations without user or worker input.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiromasa, and further in view of Kuwayama (US 20230418292 A1, having an effective filing date of at least 23 June 2023), hereafter Kuwayama.
Regarding claim 8, Hiromasa discloses the traveling control method according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein:
In the non-work area, an automatic traveling permission area where the automatic traveling of the work vehicle is permitted is set (0054, in the inter-field movement control mode 36, multiple tractors 10 are controlled to automatically travel from the field 9 where they have been automatically worked to the next field 9 where they are scheduled to work, in accordance with route information for traveling between fields, such as the travel route Rm within the field 9 and the travel route Rr on the road 95), and
In a case where a measure is taken to prohibit a vehicle, which is not related to work, from entering the automatic traveling permission area, the work vehicle in the automatic traveling permission area is permitted to automatically travel regardless of whether or not there is the confirmation operation or the confirmation action taken by the worker (0067, the overlapping portions Rx of the driving routes Rr when moving between each field refer to the portions of the driving routes Rr that are set for automatic driving on the farm road 95, 0070, when two or more tractors 10 have transitioned to the inter-field movement control mode 36, if there are no overlapping portions Rx between the travel routes Rr of the two or more tractors 10 when they move between fields, the remote management operation device 7 will cause all often two or more tractors 10 to start moving between fields, Examiner's note, the examiner is interpreting the specific distinguishing of the road 95 as a "farm road" as an indication that it is a private road closed to public traffic, and is therefore interpreting the "farm road 95" as a road which would prohibit outside vehicles).
Hiromasa fails to explicitly teach, however, wherein in a case where the measure is not taken in the automatic traveling permission area, the work vehicle in the automatic traveling permission area is permitted to automatically travel only while the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is being performed.
Kuwayama, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein in a case where the measure is not taken in the automatic traveling permission area, the work vehicle in the automatic traveling permission area is permitted to automatically travel only while the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is being performed (0042-0043, the controller 11 of the work vehicle 10 confirms that the current mode is the public road driving mode and controls the work vehicle 10 to drive automatically from the storage shed to the work area, such as agricultural land, the controller performs steering control, accelerator control, brake control, and the like of the work vehicle 10 using information acquired by the positioner 14 and the acquisition interface so that according to a driving plan acquired in advance from the information processing apparatus 20 via the communication interface 12, the work vehicle 10 is controlled to drive automatically on a public road from the storage shed to the work area, Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the "public road" to be a road that is not closed to traffic, i.e., a road which takes no measures to prohibit non-work vehicles. The examiner is also interpreting the confirmation of the control mode being the public road driving mode as reading on the "confirmation operation being performed").
Hiromasa and Kuwayama are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, work vehicle navigation systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the public road traveling of Kuwayama in order to provide a means of ensuring that the work vehicle is navigated in a safe manner. The motivation to combine is to ensure that work vehicles are navigated in as safe a manner as possible.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE A WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-6830. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM Eastern.
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, Thomas Worden can be reached at (571) 272-4876. 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.
/BLAKE A WOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3658