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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03 June 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 5-10 have been newly amended. Claims 11-14 have been newly added. Claim 2 has been newly canceled. Claims 1 and 3-14 remain pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 5, 7, and 8 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 4, Applicant claims: “…the work vehicle is caused to automatically travel only while the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is being performed.” The examiner recommends amending this limitation to recite: “…the work vehicle is caused to automatically travel only while the predetermined confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is being performed.”
Regarding claim 5, Applicant claims: “wherein in the predetermined state either an obstacle to automatic traveling in a non-work route that is preset in the non-work area is detected, or specific work is required in the work vehicle.” The examiner recommends amending this claim to recite: “wherein in the predetermined state either an obstacle to automatic traveling in a non-work route that is present
Regarding claim 7, Applicant claims: “Setting, in the non-work area, an automatic traveling permission area automatic travel of the work vehicle is permitted….” The examiner recommends amending this limitation to recite: “Setting, in the non-work area, an automatic traveling permission area where automatic travel of the work vehicle is permitted….”
Further regarding claim 7, Applicant claims: “the work vehicle is permitted to automatically travel in the automatic traveling permission area regardless of whether or not there is the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker….” The examiner recommends amending this limitation to recite: “the work vehicle is permitted to automatically travel in the automatic traveling permission area regardless of whether or not there is the predetermined confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker….”
Regarding claim 8, Applicant claims: “The traveling control method according to claim 1, wherein….” The examiner recommends amending this to recite: “The traveling control method according to claim 1, further comprising….”
Appropriate correction is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 4-6 are additionally objected to under 35 U.S.C. 112(d).
Regarding claim 4, Applicant claims: “The traveling control method according to claim 2….” The examiner notes that claim 2 has been canceled. The examiner recognizes this as a mere error, and for the sake of examination, the examiner is interpreting claim 4 as being dependent on claim 1 rather than presently canceled claim 2. Claims 5 and 6 are dependent on claim 4, and are similarly objected to.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-8 and 13 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.
Regarding claim 6, Applicant claims: “in a case 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 travel based on the non-work route is resumed.” The examiner asserts that the limitation of “in a case where the obstacle is not detected before the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker is performed, the automatic travel based on the non-work route is resumed…” renders the claim indefinite, as claim 1 recites “causing, based upon detection of a non-work area, the work vehicle to automatically travel in the non-work area only while a predetermined confirmation operation or a confirmation action by a worker is performed…” (emphasis added). Particularly, the examiner notes that it is unclear how any navigation in the non-work area could be performed before the confirmation operation or confirmation action, because claim 1 recites that the work vehicle travels in the non-work area only while the confirmation operation or confirmation action are being performed.
Regarding claim 7, Applicant claims: “setting, in the non-work area, an automatic traveling permission area where the automatic travel of the work vehicle is permitted, wherein when the work vehicle enters the automatic traveling permission area first, the work vehicle is permitted to automatically travel in the automatic traveling permission area regardless of whether or not there is the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker.” The examiner asserts that this limitation renders the claim indefinite, as claim 1 recites: “causing, based upon detection of a non-work area, the work vehicle to automatically travel in the non-work area only while a predetermined confirmation operation or a confirmation action by a worker is performed…” (emphasis added) which requires a predetermined confirmation operation/action for any travel in the non-work area. As such, it is unclear within the scope of the claims how any work vehicle could travel in any non-work area without a continuous confirmation operation by an operator.
Regarding claim 8, Applicant claims: “setting, in the non-work area, an automatic traveling permission area where the automatic traveling of the work vehicle is permitted, wherein in a case where a prohibition measure is taken to prohibit another 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 in the automatic traveling permission area regardless of whether or not there is the confirmation operation or the confirmation action by the worker....” The examiner asserts that this limitation renders the claim indefinite, as claim 1 recites: “causing, based upon detection of a non-work area, the work vehicle to automatically travel in the non-work area only while a predetermined confirmation operation or a confirmation action by a worker is performed…” (emphasis added) which requires a predetermined confirmation operation/action for any travel in the non-work area. As such, it is unclear within the scope of the claims how any work vehicle could travel in any non-work area without a continuous confirmation operation by an operator.
Because of the apparent contradictory nature of claims 6-8 when compared to claim 1 as indicated above, the examiner is not rejecting claims 6-8 on prior art at this time, see at least MPEP § 2176.06(II), and the cases cited therein, particularly In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962), which states that “a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims.” The examiner additionally notes the particular relevance of the Hiromasa (JP2022032805A), McCutcheon (US 20220174867 A1), and Kuwayama (US 20230418292 A1) references to claims 6-8 as originally filed, particularly noting their use in the previous rejections of claims 6-8.
Regarding claim 13, Applicant claims: “wherein the work vehicle may be one of a construction machine, or a snowplow.” The examiner asserts that the term “may be” renders the claim indefinite, as it is unclear whether or not the work vehicle being a construction machine or a snowplow is optional or not. The examiner recommends amending this limitation to recite: “wherein the work vehicle is one of a construction machine or a snowplow…” and is interpreting the claim as such.
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, 3-4, and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Omori (US 20240152158 A1, previously published as JP2022146069A on 05 October 2022).
Regarding claim 1, Omori discloses a traveling control method for controlling traveling of a work vehicle capable to 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 (0071, As described above, according to the present embodiment, the combine harvester 1 as the example of the work vehicle is a work vehicle that executes the autonomous travel based on the preset travel route R, and includes the autonomous travel allowance switch 34 as the example of the autonomous travel allowance operation member that allows for the autonomous travel, the travel route creating part 61 that creates the travel route R having the allowance switch-nonrequiring route R2 (allowance operation member-nonrequiring route) and the allowance switch-requiring route R1 (allowance operation member-requiring route), and the control device 50 that functions as the autonomous travel control part 62 that controls the autonomous travel which is based on the travel route R. The autonomous travel control part 62, in the allowance switch-nonrequiring route R2, executes the autonomous travel regardless of the operation (pressing) of the autonomous travel allowance switch 34);
Causing, based upon detection of a non-work area, the work vehicle to automatically travel in the non-work area only while 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 (0072, Thus, the combine harvester 1, in the allowance switch-requiring route R1, executes the autonomous travel, which is based on the travel route R, while the worker is pressing the autonomous travel allowance switch 34; thus, the autonomous travel is not continued only by mistakenly touching the autonomous travel allowance switch 34, making it possible to suppress the autonomous travel not intended by the worker, and making it possible to enhance safety.), and
Wherein, after initiating automatic travel within the non-work area, automatic travel of the work vehicle is halted when the predetermined confirmation operation being performed is released or the confirmation action being performed is released (0077, In the combine harvester 1 of the present embodiment, the autonomous travel control part 62, in the allowance switch-requiring route R1, executes the autonomous travel while the autonomous travel allowance switch 34 is being pressed, meanwhile, stops the autonomous travel when the pressing of the autonomous travel allowance switch 34 is canceled.).
Claim 10 is similar in scope to claim 1, and is similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 3, Omori 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 (0062, Further, when the combine harvester 1, in the autonomous travel in the allowance switch-nonrequiring route R2, enters the preparation section immediately before the allowance switch-requiring route R1, the autonomous travel control part 62 may notify the worker, by the screen display of the display part 40 of the maneuvering part 9 or of the display part 54 of the mobile terminal 53, that the route is about to switch from the allowance switch-nonrequiring route R2 to the allowance switch-requiring route R1 or that the autonomous travel allowance switch 34 needs to be operated so as to continue the autonomous travel in the allowance switch-requiring route R1.).
Regarding claim 4, Omori discloses the traveling control method according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein
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 (0072, Thus, the combine harvester 1, in the allowance switch-requiring route R1, executes the autonomous travel, which is based on the travel route R, while the worker is pressing the autonomous travel allowance switch 34; thus, the autonomous travel is not continued only by mistakenly touching the autonomous travel allowance switch 34, making it possible to suppress the autonomous travel not intended by the worker, and making it possible to enhance safety.).
Regarding claim 9, Omori discloses a non-transitory, computer-readable medium comprising instructions to configure a processor to perform a traveling control method that controls traveling of a work vehicle capable of automatically traveling (0036, Then, the control device 50 of the combine harvester 1 will be described with reference to FIG. 2. The control device 50 includes a computer such as a CPU, and is connected to a storing part 51 such as a ROM, a RAM, a hard disk drive and a flash memory, and to a communication part 52 that communicates with an external device. The storing part 51 stores programs and data for controlling various components and various functions of the combine harvester 1, and the control device 50 executes an arithmetic operation based on the programs and data stored in the storing part 51 thereby to control various components and various functions. The control device 50 controls the positioning unit 39, for example, thereby to acquire the position information of the combine harvester 1.), the traveling control method comprising:
Causing the work vehicle to automatically travel in a work area only while the work vehicle satisfies a traveling start condition (0071, As described above, according to the present embodiment, the combine harvester 1 as the example of the work vehicle is a work vehicle that executes the autonomous travel based on the preset travel route R, and includes the autonomous travel allowance switch 34 as the example of the autonomous travel allowance operation member that allows for the autonomous travel, the travel route creating part 61 that creates the travel route R having the allowance switch-nonrequiring route R2 (allowance operation member-nonrequiring route) and the allowance switch-requiring route R1 (allowance operation member-requiring route), and the control device 50 that functions as the autonomous travel control part 62 that controls the autonomous travel which is based on the travel route R. The autonomous travel control part 62, in the allowance switch-nonrequiring route R2, executes the autonomous travel regardless of the operation (pressing) of the autonomous travel allowance switch 34); and
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 (0072, Thus, the combine harvester 1, in the allowance switch-requiring route R1, executes the autonomous travel, which is based on the travel route R, while the worker is pressing the autonomous travel allowance switch 34; thus, the autonomous travel is not continued only by mistakenly touching the autonomous travel allowance switch 34, making it possible to suppress the autonomous travel not intended by the worker, and making it possible to enhance safety.), and
Wherein, after initiating automatic travel within the non-work area, automatic travel of the work vehicle is halted when the predetermined confirmation operation being performed is released or the confirmation action being performed is released (0077, In the combine harvester 1 of the present embodiment, the autonomous travel control part 62, in the allowance switch-requiring route R1, executes the autonomous travel while the autonomous travel allowance switch 34 is being pressed, meanwhile, stops the autonomous travel when the pressing of the autonomous travel allowance switch 34 is canceled.).
Regarding claim 11, Omori discloses the traveling control method according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the work vehicle is an agricultural vehicle (0098, In the above embodiments, the example has been described in which the work vehicle of the present invention includes the self-threshing type combine harvester 1; the present invention is, however, not limited to this example; the work vehicle of the present invention may include a passenger work vehicle such as an ordinary combine harvester, a tractor, a passenger mower, a passenger rice transplanter, a transport vehicle, a snowplow and a wheel loader, or an unmanned work vehicle such as an unmanned mower.).
Regarding claim 12, Omori discloses the traveling control method according to claim 11, and further discloses wherein the agricultural vehicle is one of a combine, a tractor, or a rice transplanter (0098, In the above embodiments, the example has been described in which the work vehicle of the present invention includes the self-threshing type combine harvester 1; the present invention is, however, not limited to this example; the work vehicle of the present invention may include a passenger work vehicle such as an ordinary combine harvester, a tractor, a passenger mower, a passenger rice transplanter, a transport vehicle, a snowplow and a wheel loader, or an unmanned work vehicle such as an unmanned mower.).
Regarding claim 13, Omori discloses the traveling control method according to claim 1, and Omori further discloses wherein the work vehicle may be one of a construction machine, or a snowplow (0098, In the above embodiments, the example has been described in which the work vehicle of the present invention includes the self-threshing type combine harvester 1; the present invention is, however, not limited to this example; the work vehicle of the present invention may include a passenger work vehicle such as an ordinary combine harvester, a tractor, a passenger mower, a passenger rice transplanter, a transport vehicle, a snowplow and a wheel loader, or an unmanned work vehicle such as an unmanned mower.).
Regarding claim 14, Omori discloses the traveling control method according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the work area comprises a plurality of fields and the non-work area comprises at least one road connecting the plurality of fields (0096, when the combine harvester 1 executes the mowing work over plural farm fields, the allowance switch-requiring route R1 and the allowance switch-nonrequiring route R2 may be set for a movement route for the combine harvester 1 to move between the farm fields. Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the routes between farm fields as a "road").
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omori, and further in view of Hiromasa (JP2022032805A), hereafter Hiromasa.
Regarding claim 5, Omori discloses the traveling control method according to claim 4, but fails to explicitly disclose 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, or a state in which specific work is required in the work vehicle.
Hiromasa, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein a 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).
Omori and Hiromasa are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., 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 obstacle detection of Hiromasa in order to improve the safety of the work vehicle while performing autonomous driving. The motivation to combine is to provide a means of further detecting the environment of the work vehicle, in order to ensure that the work vehicle is navigated in a safe manner.
Conclusion
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/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights