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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-24 of US application 18/853,963 were filed on 10/2/24.
On the same day, applicant filed a preliminary amendment. Claims 4, 6, 8, 10-12, 14-19, 21, and 23-24 were amended. Claims 3, 5, 7 and 20 were cancelled. Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 8-19, and 21-24 are presently pending and presented for examination.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 11, 13, 19 and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 6, “controlling an opening or the like” should be “controlling an opening
In claim 11, “from the sensor data received from the environment sensor(s)” should be “from the sensor data received from the one or more environment sensors”
In claim 13, “wherein the measure of throughput comprises” should be “wherein the measure of the throughput comprises”
In claim 19, “A control system of” should be “A control system [[of]] as claimed in”
In claim 21, “A cleaning system for sensing arrangement” should be “A cleaning system for a sensing arrangement”
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.
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) because the claim limitations use 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 limitations are:
“sensing arrangement” configured to output data in claims 1 and 24
“operable components” for performing cleaning in claims 1 and 24
“airflow system” to generate an airflow in claim 4
“image processing module” for processing image data in claim 11
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. A review of the specification reveals the following:
“sensing arrangement” : comprises a sensor in [0010]. This is adequate structure to perform the claimed functions.
“operable components” : may comprise a sieve opening in [0013]. This is adequate structure to perform the claimed functions.
“airflow system” : comprises a fan in [0044]. This is adequate structure to perform the claimed functions.
“image processing module” : implementable via machine-readable instructions executable by a processor in at least [0070]-[0071]. This is adequate structure to perform the claimed functions.
Since there is adequate structure in the specification to perform all the claimed functions, no 112 rejections are given and no further action is required by applicant with respect to the above 112(f) interpretation.
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, 10, 15-19, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1), hereinafter referred to as Henry. Claims with similar limitations may be grouped together for applicant’s reading convenience. All claims in any such group are rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claims 1 and 24, Henry discloses A control system for a sensing arrangement of an agricultural machine, the control system comprising one or more controllers (See at least Fig. 3 in Henry: Henry discloses that the controller 122 may be communicatively coupled to one or more vision-based sensors 104, which are configured to capture image date 128 as the agricultural machine 10 is moved across the field [See at least Henry, 0055]), and being configured to:
receive operational data indicative of an output from the sensing arrangement and/or an operational parameter for the agricultural machine (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (202), the method 200 may include receiving vision data from a vision-based sensor supported on an agricultural machine as the agricultural machine is being moved across the field [See at least Henry, 0055]);
determine, in dependence on the received operational data, a cleaning strategy for a cleaning system of the sensing arrangement (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]); and
generate and output a control signal for controlling one or more operable components associated with the cleaning system for controlling the cleaning system in accordance with the cleaning strategy (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]);
wherein the cleaning strategy comprises controlling operation of the one or more operable components (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]) in a manner so as to reduce a build-up of material on a surface of the sensing arrangement (See at least Fig. 3 in Henry: Henry discloses that the oscillator 118 and/or ultrasonic transmitter 120 may be configured to oscillate the vision-based sensor 104 to remove debris 44 from the vision-based sensor 104 [See at least Henry, 0059]. Henry further discloses that, More particular, the controller 122 may power the oscillator 118 and/or ultrasonic transmitter 120 to oscillate the vision-based sensor 104 [See at least Henry, 0059]).
Regarding claim 8, Henry discloses A control system of claim 1, wherein the operational parameter for the machine comprises a location of the machine within a working environment (Henry discloses that each vision-based sensor 104 may be configured to capture image data and and/or other vision-based data from the field (e.g., of the soil present within the field) across which the implement 14 is moved [See at least Henry, 0023]. Images of this soil are indicative of the location of the machine in the working environment).
Regarding claim 10, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1, configured to receive the operational data in the form of sensor data (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (202), the method 200 may include receiving vision data from a vision-based sensor supported on an agricultural machine as the agricultural machine is being moved across the field [See at least Henry, 0055]) from one or more environment sensors associated with the machine (Henry discloses that each vision-based sensor 104 may be configured to capture image data and and/or other vision-based data from the field (e.g., of the soil present within the field) across which the implement 14 is moved [See at least Henry, 0023]).
Regarding claim 15, Henry discloses f A control system of claim 1, configured to monitor the output of the sensing arrangement (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (202), the method 200 may include receiving vision data from a vision-based sensor supported on an agricultural machine as the agricultural machine is being moved across the field [See at least Henry, 0055]) and to determine a need for performance of the cleaning strategy in dependence on that output (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]).
Regarding claim 16, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1, operable to receive sensor data from one or more further sensors monitoring one or more further crop parameters (See at least Fig. 1 in Henry: Henry discloses that the agricultural machine 10 may include one or more vision-based sensors 104 coupled thereto and/or supported thereon [See at least Henry, 0023]. Henry further discloses that As will be described below, each vision-based sensor 104 may be configured to capture image data and and/or other vision-based data from the field (e.g., of the soil present within the field) across which the implement 14 is moved [See at least Henry, 0023]).
Regarding claim 17, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1, operable to determine the cleaning strategy for the sensor arrangement (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]) in dependence on one or more environmental parameters (Henry discloses that each vision-based sensor 104 may be configured to capture image data and and/or other vision-based data from the field (e.g., of the soil present within the field) across which the implement 14 is moved [See at least Henry, 0023]. These are images of the environment, and it will be appreciated that if the view of the environment by the sensor is obscured, then the cleaning operation begins as discussed in at least [Henry, 0058]).
Regarding claim 18, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1, configured to automate (Henry discloses that the controller 122 may be configured to determine the vision-based sensor(s) 104 may be obscured and/or inoperative and initiate the cleaning procedure [See at least Henry, 0041]. Henry further discloses that the controller 122 may be configured to activate the vibration source(s) at predetermined intervals of time for the predetermined length of time [See at least Henry, 0041]. Henry further discloses that, Specifically, the predetermined interval may be stored within the memory 126 based on historical data indicative of the interval of time between when a vision-based sensor 104 is likely to become obscured with debris 140 to a degree requiring cleaning [See at least Henry, 0041]) performance of the cleaning strategy in dependence on one or more operating conditions being met (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]).
Regarding claim 19, Henry discloses A control system of claim 1, wherein the one or more operable components comprise a user interface for providing an indication to an operator of the machine of a need or suggestion to perform the cleaning strategy (Henry discloses that an operator monitoring the images displayed by the controller 122 may determine that the vision-based sensor(s) 104 is obscured with debris 44 (FIG. 2) [See at least Henry, 0039]. Henry discloses that, For instance, the video displayed on the user interface 102 may be of low quality, blurry, partially blocked, or fully blocked [See at least Henry, 0039]. Henry discloses that, As such, when the operator determines the vision-based sensor(s) 104 is obscured or inoperative, he/she may initiate a cleaning operation of the respective vision-based sensor(s) 104 [See at least Henry, 0039]. Henry discloses that, In one embodiment, the operator may initiate the cleaning procedure utilizing one or more of the input devices (toggles, switches, levers, etc.) of the user interface 102 [See at least Henry, 0039]).
Regarding claim 21, Henry discloses A cleaning system for sensing arrangement of an agricultural vehicle comprising (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]) and/or being controllable by the control system of claim 1 (See at least the 102 rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 22, Henry discloses A sensing arrangement comprising one or more sensor units and the cleaning system (See at least Fig. 6 in Henry: Henry discloses that at (204), the method may include initiating a cleaning procedure by activating a vibration source, the vibration source configured as separate component from the vision-based sensor, when it is determined the vision-based sensor may be to be at least one of obscured or inoperative or at predetermined intervals of time [See at least Henry, 0058]) of claim 21 (See at least the 102 rejection of claim 21 above).
Regarding claim 23, Henry discloses An agricultural machine comprising the cleaning system (See at least Fig. 2 in Henry: Henry discloses a schematic view of one embodiment of a vision-based sensor 104 and an associated cleaning system 110 suitable for use within an agricultural machine [See at least Henry, 0026]) of claim 21 (See at least the 102 rejection of claim 21 above).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1) in view of Walker (US 20180053067 A1), hereinafter referred to as Walker.
Regarding claim 2, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1.
However, Henry does not explicitly teach the system wherein the sensing arrangement comprises a grain loss sensor.
However, Walker does teach a system wherein the sensing arrangement comprises a grain loss sensor (Walker teaches that In order to determine the amount and type of harvest loss 108 or pre-harvest loss 106, infrared thermal imaging devices 100 of the grain loss sensor array system 98 capture and/or record infrared images or video of the ground over which the header 18 has passed or over which the header 18 is passing [See at least Walker, 0036]). Both Walker and Henry teach agricultural vehicles with visual sensors. However, only Walker explicitly teaches where the visual sensors may include grain loss sensors.
It would have been obvious to anyone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the visual sensor-equipped agricultural vehicle of Henry to also include visual grain loss sensors, as in Walker. Anyone of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that visual grain loss sensors are another type of agricultural visual sensor that can benefit from the cleaning arrangement of Henry.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1) in view of Han et al. (US 20190335572 A1), hereinafter referred to as Han.
Regarding claim 4, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1.
However, Henry does not explicitly teach the system wherein:
the one or more operable components comprise an airflow system for the machine; and
the cleaning strategy comprises controlling an airflow generated by the airflow system.
However, Han does teach a system wherein:
the one or more operable components comprise an airflow system for the machine (See at least Fig. 5 in Han: Han discloses that a vehicle 500 contains various sensors 501-507 that may be cleaned by the apparatus configured to induce airflow over a sensor lens 100 [See at least Han, 0049]); and
the cleaning strategy comprises controlling an airflow generated by the airflow system (See at least Fig. 5 in Han: Han discloses that a vehicle 500 contains various sensors 501-507 that may be cleaned by the apparatus configured to induce airflow over a sensor lens 100 [See at least Han, 0049]). Both Han and Henry teach methods for cleaning lenses of visual sensors of vehicles. However, only Han explicitly teaches where the sensors may be cleaned via forced airflow.
It would have been obvious to anyone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle sensor lens cleaning method of Henry to use force airflow, as in Han. Anyone of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that this is an obvious substitution for the vibration-based cleaning method of Henry.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1) in view of Missotten et al. (US 20220394925 A1), hereinafter referred to as Missotten.
Regarding claim 6, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1.
However, Henry does not explicitly teach the system wherein:
the one or more operable components comprise a crop processing mechanism of the machine; and
the cleaning strategy comprises controlling an opening or the like associated with one or more operable components of the crop processing mechanism.
However, Missotten does teach a system wherein:
the one or more operable components comprise a crop processing mechanism of the machine (See at least Fig. 3 in Missotten: Missotten teaches that when it is determined that cleaning of the sensor window 94 is needed, the controller may be configured to control the position of the sensor arrangement 90—e.g. by increasing the inclination of the sensor window 94, i.e. increasing the angle 96—to increase the cleaning effect of the crop material as it flows past the window 94 [See at least Missotten, 0065]. Missotten further teaches that This may be achieved by moving the window 94 so that the crop material generally impacts the window 94 in a more direct manner, which assist in dislodging or otherwise clearing accumulated substances such as other crop material, dirt, etc., on the window 94 [See at least Missotten, 0065]); and
the cleaning strategy comprises controlling an opening or the like associated with one or more operable components of the crop processing mechanism (See at least Fig. 3 in Missotten: Missotten teaches that when it is determined that cleaning of the sensor window 94 is needed, the controller may be configured to control the position of the sensor arrangement 90—e.g. by increasing the inclination of the sensor window 94, i.e. increasing the angle 96—to increase the cleaning effect of the crop material as it flows past the window 94 [See at least Missotten, 0065]. Missotten further teaches that This may be achieved by moving the window 94 so that the crop material generally impacts the window 94 in a more direct manner, which assist in dislodging or otherwise clearing accumulated substances such as other crop material, dirt, etc., on the window 94 [See at least Missotten, 0065]). Both Missotten and Henry teach methods for cleaning visual sensors used by agricultural machines. However, only Missotten explicitly teaches where the sensor may be involved in crop processing and where the sensor may be cleaned by adjusting an angle of an opening between the sensor and part of the crop processing equipment so that crop material dislodges debris from the sensor lens.
It would have been obvious to anyone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the agricultural sensor cleaning system of Henry to also have a sensor involved in crop processing, where the sensor may be cleaned by adjusting an angle of an opening between the sensor and part of the crop processing equipment so that crop material dislodges debris from the sensor lens, as in Missotten. It will be appreciated that this is an application where the sensor cleaning control flow of Henry may obviously be applied, albeit with a different cleaning mechanism suitable to the sensor at hand.
Regarding claim 12, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1.
However, Henry does not explicitly disclose the system wherein the operational parameter for the machine comprises a measure of a throughput of material in one or more material flowpaths within the machine.
However, Missotten does teach a system wherein the operational parameter for the machine comprises a measure of a throughput of material in one or more material flowpaths within the machine (See at least Fig. 2 in Missotten: Missotten teaches that The sensor arrangement 90 includes a crop material sensor 92—which is in the form of a camera in the described example—and a sensor window 94 through which the crop material sensor 92 monitors the crop material as it flows along the flow path 88, i.e. the camera 92 is generally behind the window 94 relative to the flow path 88 [See at least Missotten, 0053]. Missotten further teaches that the crop material may be analysed to determine a quality or intensity of the chopping performed by the chopper 72 [See at least Missotten, 0054]. Missotten further teaches that The intensity or quality of the chopped crop residue may be a measure of any suitable characteristics of the chopped material, for example a length, density, thickness, etc. of the chopped straw or chaff [See at least Missotten, 0054]. Missotten further teaches that The determined intensity or quality of the chopped crop residue may also include information such as a relative amount of unthreshed grain in the residue, a relative amount of free grain in the residue, a colour of the straw stems (e.g. how green the stems are), straw quality, etc. [See at least Missotten, 0054]. The amount of threshed grain may be regarded as a throughput). Both Missotten and Henry teaches visual sensors for agricultural vehicles. However, only Missotten explicitly teaches where the sensor may measure a throughput of grain.
It would have been obvious to anyone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor system of Henry to also measure a throughput of grain, as in Missotten. Anyone of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that this is another valuable application for visual sensors in an agricultural vehicle.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1) in view of Miyashita et al. (US 20240315158 A1), hereinafter referred to as Miyashita.
Regarding claim 11, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in A control system as claimed in claim 10.
However, Henry does not explicitly teach the control system comprising or being operably connected to an image processing module for determining, from the sensor data received from the environment sensor(s), the location of the machine with respect to the working environment.
However, Miyashita does teach a control system comprising or being operably connected to an image processing module for determining, from the sensor data received from the environment sensor(s), the location of the machine with respect to the working environment (Miyashita teaches that image recognition processing may include finding a row region from an image that is acquired by the imaging device 120 (FIG. 2), detecting a region between adjacent row regions (work path), and performing computation to determine the relative position of a row region with respect to the agricultural machine 100 [See at least Miyashita, 0079]). Both Miyashita and Henry teach imaging devices for agricultural vehicles. However, only Miyashita explicitly teaches where the imaging device may be used to localize the agricultural vehicle within the working environment.
It would have been obvious to anyone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the agricultural vehicle imaging device of Henry so that it is also used to localize the agricultural vehicle within the working environment, as in Henry. Doing so helps the vehicle navigate in the environment more accurately.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1) in view of Talbi (US 20090313962 A1), hereinafter referred to as Talbi.
Regarding claim 14, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 1.
However, Henry does not explicitly teach the system wherein the operational parameter for the machine comprises a measure of a pitch, roll or tilt angle of the machine.
However, Talbi does teach a system wherein the operational parameter for the machine comprises a measure of a pitch, roll or tilt angle of the machine (Talbi teaches that the at least one microcontroller is configured to automatically and periodically determine the side-to-side angle of tilt of the agricultural harvester [See at least Talbi, 0008]). Both Talbi and Henry teach agricultural vehicles. However, only Talbi explicitly teaches where the agricultural vehicle may detect its own tilt angle.
It would have been obvious to anyone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle of Henry to also detect its own tilt, as in Talbi. Anyone of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that this value is useful for all kinds of vehicle control application (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Talbi, 0008]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The closest prior art of record is Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1) in view of Vedder et al. (US 20200367484 A1), hereinafter referred to as Vedder. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 9, Henry discloses A control system as claimed in claim 8.
However, none of the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, teaches or suggests where the system is configured to control performance of a cleaning operation for the sensing arrangement in dependence on the machine being located within a headland of the working environment.
A “headland” is an area of an agricultural field that is designated as an area in which agricultural vehicles take turns. Because all agricultural vehicles for a particular field use the headlands to turn, the headlands are usually designated as having poor soil quality due to high machinery traffic and excessive compaction associated with these turns.
Vedder teaches detecting when the vehicle is located in the headlands based on map information (See at least [Vedder, 0020]). However, this has nothing to do with activating cleaning operations of a sensor. Conversely, Henry discusses activating cleaning operations of sensors. However, this has nothing to do with whether or not the vehicle is present in the headlands. Accordingly, none of the prior art of record discusses performing cleaning of machinery sensors based on the machine being located in the headlands. Therefore, the prior art of record is simply not specific enough to read on these additional limitations.
For at least the above stated reasons, claim 9 contains allowable subject matter.
The closest prior art of record is Henry et al. (US 20210088780 A1) in view of Missotten et al. (US 20220394925 A1) in further view of Myers (US 20150168187 A1), hereinafter referred to as Myers. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 13, Henry in view of Missotten teaches A control system as claimed in claim 12.
Myers teaches a control system wherein the measure of throughput comprises a flow rate of material within the machine (See at least Fig. 1 in Myers: Myers teaches a grain elevator 22 [See at least Myers, 0026]. Also see at least Fig. 2 in Myers: Myers teaches a vertical cross section through the upper or outlet end of the clean grain elevator of a typical harvester, with a grain mass flow rate sensor installed in a grain collection area near the outlet of the elevator [See at least Myers, 0027]).
However, none of the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, teaches or suggests the control system wherein the control system is configured to:
compare the measured flow rate with a threshold flow rate; and
determine the cleaning strategy in dependence thereon.
In order for a reference to read on the above missing claim limitations, the reference would have to teach where a flow rate of an agricultural machine activates a particular cleaning operation. However, this is not taught or suggested by the prior art of record. While Myers does teach the existence of a flow rate sensor (See at least [Myers, 0027]), this flow rate sensors has nothing to do with cleaning off a sensor. Conversely, while Henry and Missotten teach methods for cleaning agricultural vehicle sensors, none of the cleaning operations of Henry or Missotten are triggered by a particular flow rate. There is no way to combine the prior art of record to arrive at the claimed invention.
For at least the above stated reasons, claim 13 contains allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAEEM T ALAM whose telephone number is (571)272-5901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-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, FADEY JABR can be reached at (571) 272-1516. 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.
/NAEEM TASLIM ALAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3668