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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a non-Final office action in merits. Claims 1-16, as originally filed, are presently pending and have been elected and considered below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/10/2024 and 10/29/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by US 2021/0315145 A1, Bassett (hereinafter Bassett).
As to claim 1, Bassett discloses a working machine (Fig 1), comprising: vehicle wheels (Fig 1); a working unit (Fig 1); and a recognition unit configured to recognize a surrounding vicinity of the working machine (pars 0289-0291, 0328, 0333, wave pattern recognition unit with sensors to detect/recognize objects or ground/road condition variations).
As to claim 2, Bassett discloses the working machine according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit includes at least one of a front part recognition unit that is disposed frontwardly with respect to a front-rear center that is a center in a front-rear direction of the working machine and a rear part recognition unit that is disposed rearwardly with respect to the front-rear center (pars 0179, 0194, 0221, position sensors for a soil-hardness sensing device attached in front of an agricultural row unit to detect and recognize the soil hardness at center location in the front of the machine agriculture).
As to claim 15, Bassett discloses the working machine according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit is disposed at a position that, in a top view, does not overlap with the working unit (pars 0007, 0009, 0070-0071, a ground hardness sensor associated with the wheel (e.g. not overlap a working unit).
As to claim 16, Bassett discloses the working machine according to claim 1, further comprising: a machine body or a framework (Fig 1); the machine body or the framework includes a first portion and a second portion (Fig 1); the working unit is fixed to the first portion; and the recognition unit is fixed to the second portion (Figs 36, 38: 2138-2140; pars 0187, 0198, position sensors mounted to a portion of the agriculture machine).
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or
nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 3-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassett in view of US 2021/0100156 A1, Iwase et al. (hereinafter Iwase).
As to claim 3, Bassett discloses the working machine according to claim 2, wherein the front part recognition unit comprises: a first front part recognition unit configured to recognize a surrounding vicinity of the working machine recognized by a first recognition mechanism (pars 0179, 0194, 0221, position sensors, also see claim 2) but does not expressly disclose a second front part recognition unit disposed in close proximity to the first front part recognition unit, and configured to recognize a surrounding vicinity of the working machine recognized by a second recognition mechanism that differs from the first recognition mechanism.
Iwase, in the same or similar field of endeavor, further teaches a second front part recognition unit disposed in close proximity to the first front part recognition unit, and configured to recognize a surrounding vicinity of the working machine recognized by a second recognition mechanism that differs from the first recognition mechanism (Figs 1-2; pars 0009, 0015, 0018, 0036, 0110, distance sensors such as Lidar to measure a distance to a measurement target from the machine).
Therefore, consider Bassett and Iwase’s teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art before the filing date of invention to incorporate Iwase’s teachings in Bassett’s method to prevent the machine in motion colliding from an object.
As to claim 4, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 3, wherein the second front part recognition unit is disposed at a higher position than the first front part recognition unit, and the second front part recognition unit has a wider recognition range than the first front part recognition unit (Iwase: Figs 1-2; pars 0009, 0015, 0018, 0036, 0110, distance sensors such as Lidar provide a wider detection range than position sensors), a higher distance measurement ability than the first front part recognition unit, or a wider recognition range and a higher distance measurement ability than the first front part recognition unit (Iwase: Figs 1-2; pars 0009, 0015, 0018, 0036, 0110, distance sensors such as Lidar provide a higher distance measurement ability than position sensors).
As to claim 5, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 3, wherein the first front part recognition unit has a higher tolerance to a recognition environment than the second front part recognition unit (Bassett: Figs 56-58, pressure sensors measuring hydraulic pressure with more tolerance to environment than position sensors or distance sensors; pars 0261, 0266-0268), and the first front part recognition unit is disposed at a lower position than the second front part recognition unit, at a position more frontward than the second front part recognition unit, or at a position lower and more frontward than the second front part recognition unit (Bassett: Fig 36: 2138-2140; Iwase: Figs 1-2: 101-102, distance sensors).
As to claim 6, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 2, wherein: the vehicle wheels include a front wheel disposed frontwardly with respect to the front-rear center (Bassett: Fig 1, front wheels; Iwase: Figs 1-2); and the front part recognition unit is disposed more rearwardly than a front end part of the front wheel (Bassett: Fig 36: 2138-2140, more rearwardly than the front wheels).
As to claim 7, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 6, wherein the front part recognition unit is disposed upwardly of the vehicle wheels in a vertical direction of the working machine (Bassett: Figs 56-58; Fig 36: 2138-2140), and further, in a top view, is disposed at a position that overlaps with the front wheel (Bassett: Figs 56-58; pars 0261, 0266-0268, pressure sensors disposed closed to the wheels; Iwase: Fig 11).
As to claim 8, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to a claim 2, wherein the front part recognition unit is positioned in a manner so that a center of a recognition range of the front part recognition unit is oriented in a left-right direction and a rearward direction of the working machine (Bassett: Fig 36: 2138-2140).
As to claim 9, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 8, wherein: the vehicle wheels include a left vehicle wheel that is disposed more on a left side than a center line that passes through a left-right center that is a center in the left-right direction and extends in the front-rear direction, and a right vehicle wheel that is disposed more on a right side than the center line (Bassett: Fig 1, Fig 36: 2138-2140); and the front part recognition unit is disposed in closer proximity to the center line than a left end part of the left vehicle wheel, or alternatively, in closer proximity to the center line than a right end part of the right vehicle wheel (Bassett: Fig 1, Fig 36: 2138-2140).
As to claim 10, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 2, wherein the rear part recognition unit is disposed at a higher position than the front part recognition unit (Iwase: Figs 1-2, 11).
As to claim 11, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 10, wherein: the recognition unit has one or more of the front part recognition units, and one or more of the rear part recognition units; and a number of the rear part recognition units is less than a number of the front part recognition units (Bassett: par 0226; Iwase: Figs 1-2, 11).
Note that locations, number and/or configuration of sensors in a working machine as recited in, for example, claims 4-11, are essentially choice of design driven by applications, not representing patentable distinct features from an independent claim.
As to claim 12, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit comprises in a top view: a left part recognition unit disposed on a left side with respect to a center line that passes through a left-right center that is a center in the left right direction of the working machine (Bassett: Fig 1, Fig 36: 2138-2140; Iwase: Figs 1-2, 11) and extends in the front-rear direction of the working machine (Bassett: Fig 1, Fig 36: 2138-2140); and a right part recognition unit disposed on a right side with respect to the center line (Bassett: Fig 1, Fig 36: 2138-2140).
As to claim 13, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 12, wherein: the left part recognition unit comprises: a left front part recognition unit disposed frontwardly with respect to a front-rear center that is a center in the front-rear direction (see rejection in claims 2, 6); and a left rear part recognition unit disposed rearwardly with respect to the front-rear center; the right part recognition unit comprises: a right front part recognition unit disposed frontwardly with respect to the front-rear center; and a right rear part recognition unit disposed rearwardly with respect to the front-rear center (see rejection in claims 2, 6).
As to claim 14, Bassett as modified discloses the working machine according to claim 12, further comprising: a riding section in which an occupant rides (Iwase: Figs 1, 11, cabin for a driver); and a protective member configured to protect the occupant who is riding in the riding section (Iwase: Figs 1, 11, cover for the driver or occupant cabin); wherein the protective member is provided to be capable of moving between a first position that is capable of protecting the occupant who is riding in the riding section (Iwase: Figs 1, 11, door openable for driver or occupant to get in and out), and a second position that is not capable of protecting the occupant (Iwase: Figs 1, 11, portion the cabin not being covered (e.g. in the rear); the left part recognition unit is a left rear part recognition unit disposed rearwardly with respect to a front-rear center that is a center in the front-rear direction (see rejection in claims 12-13); the right part recognition unit is a right rear part recognition unit disposed rearwardly with respect to the front-rear center (see rejection in claim ); and the left rear part recognition unit and the right rear part recognition unit are disposed more frontwardly than a rear end part of the protective member that is positioned at the second position (see rejection in claims 12-13).
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular column, line number, paragraphs and/or figure(s) in the reference(s) as applied to the claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the reference(s) in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUN SHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7927. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30-5:50 PT.
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, Amandeep Saini can be reached on 571-272-3382. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QUN SHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662
Prosecution Insights