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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 7/2/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search or examination burden. This is not found persuasive because as described in the restriction requirement, each invention requires its own search and consideration unique to the other inventions and, in fact, all have different classifications.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds the upper limit of 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
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) 1-4, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wendte et al. 9,648,802.
Independent Claim 1: Wendte discloses a precision planter (Figs. 2 and 4) [for planting cover crops]*, the precision planter comprising:
(a) a frame (11) configured to transport the precision planter through a crop area;
(b) at least one hopper (23) coupled to the frame; and
(c) a seed dispersion system (Fig. 4) coupled to the frame, the seed dispersion system comprising:
(i) a first seed meter (67) configured to selectively receive a first seed mix (21) from the at least one hopper;
(ii) a funnel (at 61 in Fig. 4) disposed below the first seed meter configured to receive the first seed mix from the at least one hopper;
(iii) a seed dispersion tube (63, 65) configured to receive the first seed mix;
(iv) a fan (59) in fluidic communication with the seed dispersion tube, wherein the fan is configured to transport the first seed mix through the seed dispersion tube;
(v) a seed dispersion head (107) in fluidic communication with the seed dispersion tube; and
(vi) a plurality of seed hoses (111) in fluidic communication with the seed dispersion head, each of the plurality of seed hoses configured to deliver the first seed mix to the crop area (via 13), and
wherein the seed dispersion system is configured to implement a prescription map of the crop area comprising at least two cover crop zones (see the map in Fig. 7 showing four zones VA1-VZ4), the at least two cover crop zones determined based on at least one of geographic data (the map of Fig. 7), topographic data, soil data, water retention data, and weather data to determine the first seed mix (say, Type A), the first seed mix corresponding to a first cover crop zone (VZ1),
wherein the seed dispersion system is configured to disperse the first seed mix at a first seed dispersion rate in the first cover crop zone (col. 1, lns. 38-41), as per claim 1.
*The bracketed text is intended use language. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Therefore, since Wendte’s planter is capable of planting cover crops, the claims are fully anticipated.
Dependent Claims 2-4, 6-7: Wendte further discloses wherein the seed dispersion system (Fig. 4) is configured to disperse the first seed mix (Type A) at a second seed dispersion rate (col.. 1, lns. 38-41) in a second cover crop zone (any other zones for Type A seen in Fig. 7), the second seed dispersion rate being different from the first seed dispersion rate (col. 1, lns. 38-41), as per claim 2;
wherein the seed dispersion system (Fig. 4) is configured to disperse a second seed mix (Type B) in a second cover crop zone (VZ2), the second seed mix being different from the first seed mix (Type A), as per claim 3;
wherein the seed dispersion system (Fig. 4) is operable using a controller (33), as per claim 4;
wherein the at least one hopper (23) comprises a plurality of hoppers (25, 25, 25, 25, as seen in Fig. 4), each hopper associated with a respective seed meter (67, 67, 67, 67), each hopper being configured to dispense a respective seed mix (21a, 21b, 21c, 21d), each respective seed mix comprising at least one type of seed (col. 5, lns. 10-14) or fertilizer, and wherein the seed dispersion system (Fig. 4) is configured to mix together the respective seed mixes (col. 8, lns. 8-13), as per claim 6;
wherein the first seed mix (Type A) comprises a single cover crop seed type (Type A, col. 5, lns. 10-14), as per claim 7.
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wendte et al. in view of Staeter 9,148,992.
Dependent Claim 5: The planter is disclosed as applied above. However, Wendte fails to disclose wherein the geographic data comprises satellite data, as per claim 5.
Staeter discloses a similar planter wherein the geographic data comprises satellite data (col. 2, ln. 66-col. 3, ln. 3), as per claim 5.
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 satellite date of Staeter for the geographic data of Wendte since such a source of geographic data is old and known in the art.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wendte et al. in view of Gray et al. 10,813,280.
Dependent Claim 8: The planter is disclosed as applied above. However, Wendte fails to disclose wherein the first seed mix comprises a fertilizer, as per claim 8.
Gray discloses a similar planter wherein the first seed mix comprises a fertilizer (see col. 3, lns. 1-4), as per claim 8.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to obvious to provide the seed and fertilizer mix of Gray for the planter of Wendte since such a combination of elements for planting is old and well-known.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wendte et al. in view of Gervais et al. 10,820,484.
Dependent Claim 9: The planter is disclosed as applied above. However, Wendte fails to disclose wherein at least one cover crop zone comprises a fertilizer prescription zone, as per claim 9.
Gervais discloses a similar planter wherein at least one cover crop zone comprises a fertilizer prescription zone (col. 2, lns. 19-20), 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 fertilizer prescription zone of Gervais for the planter of Wendte in order to provide fertilizer in a planted field for optimized health and growth of the crop.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached PTOL-892. Stehling et al. 7,775,167 discloses a planter similar to that of the claims but does not show the seed dispersion system components as clearly as Wendte et al. does.
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 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights