DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office action on the merits. Claims 1-39 are currently pending and addressed below.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 10/30/2025 has been received and considered.
The information disclosure statement filed 10/10/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to in lined through references has not been considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 36, line 3: “implement (445, 456 in Figure 4)” should read “implement (446, 456 in Figure 4)”
Page 61, lines 27-28: “main memory 904” should read “main memory 903”
Page 61, line 28: “static memory 906” should read “static memory 905”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8, 11-18, 30, and 32-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Regarding claims 1 and 30, these claims recite, when considered individually or as a whole, an autonomous agricultural assembly configurator. Therefore, claims 1 and 30 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below). Claim 1 recites:
An autonomous agricultural assembly configurator comprising:
one or more processors configured to:
receive characteristic bundle inputs including:
a field characteristic bundle associated with a field;
an implement characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural implement;
and a vehicle characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural vehicle;
and generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs including:
determining the autonomous agricultural operation based on the implement characteristic bundle;
and determining operation parameters for the autonomous agricultural operation based on one or more of the implement characteristic bundle or the vehicle characteristic bundle.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitations constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind and/or “by a human using a pen and paper.” See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III). For example, the “generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs” step includes a human compiling a list of instructions or parameters for an autonomous configuration based on observing information. The “determining the autonomous agricultural operation based on the implement characteristic bundle” step includes a human operator observing and mentally determining the type of work that can be completed by the autonomous agricultural vehicle based on the type of implement attached to the vehicle. The “determining operation parameters for the autonomous agricultural operation based on one or more of the implement characteristic bundle or the vehicle characteristic bundle” step includes a human operator mentally determining operation parameters for the vehicle based on observing implement and/or vehicle information. For example, the human operator may determine operation parameters regarding how many rows the vehicle will need to travel to cover the entirety of the working field, based on the dimensions of the agricultural vehicle and implement. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
Independent claim 30 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below). Claim 30 recites:
An autonomous agricultural assembly configurator comprising:
one or more processors configured to:
receive characteristic bundle inputs including:
a field characteristic bundle associated with a field;
an implement characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural implement;
and a vehicle characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural vehicle;
generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs;
and generate one or more operation refinements, the one or more operation refinements having refinement parameters including:
one or more sensor thresholds associated with available sensors included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles;
and one or more actions associated with available actuators included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles, the one or more actions linked with the one or more sensor thresholds and sensors.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitations constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind and/or “by a human using a pen and paper.” See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III). For example, the “generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs” step includes a human compiling a list of instructions or parameters for an autonomous configuration based on observing information. The “generate one or more operation refinements, the one or more operation refinements having refinement parameters including: one or more sensor thresholds associated with available sensors included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles; and one or more actions associated with available actuators included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles, the one or more actions linked with the one or more sensor thresholds and sensors” includes a human operator mentally determining to adjust operation of the agricultural vehicle based on the sensors. For example, a human operator may determine that a modification (i.e., refinement) is necessary because an agricultural vehicle is operating outside of a sensor range (i.e., a sensor threshold). The human operator may then determine how the agricultural vehicle should be controlled (i.e., one or more actions associated with available actuators) to be brought back into an operating range of the sensor. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea of claim 1 are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions
continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
An autonomous agricultural assembly configurator comprising:
one or more processors configured to:
receive characteristic bundle inputs including:
a field characteristic bundle associated with a field;
an implement characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural implement;
and a vehicle characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural vehicle;
and generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs including:
determining the autonomous agricultural operation based on the implement characteristic bundle;
and determining operation parameters for the autonomous agricultural operation based on one or more of the implement characteristic bundle or the vehicle characteristic bundle.
The additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea of claim 30 are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions
continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
An autonomous agricultural assembly configurator comprising:
one or more processors configured to:
receive characteristic bundle inputs including:
a field characteristic bundle associated with a field;
an implement characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural implement;
and a vehicle characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural vehicle;
generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs;
and generate one or more operation refinements, the one or more operation refinements having refinement parameters including:
one or more sensor thresholds associated with available sensors included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles;
and one or more actions associated with available actuators included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles, the one or more actions linked with the one or more sensor thresholds and sensors.
For the following reasons, the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application. Regarding the additional limitations of “receive characteristic bundle inputs including: a field characteristic bundle associated with a field; an implement characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural implement; and a vehicle characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural vehicle,” these limitation recite mere data transmission that is insignificant extra solution activity. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). The independent claims also recite the additional element of a processor which is a generic computing component merely used as a tool to perform the abstract idea. See MPEP § 2106.05(f).
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitations as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitations add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. See MPEP 2106.05. Accordingly, the additional limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the Revised Guidance, independent claims 1 and 30 do not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to nothing more than insignificant extra solution activity and generic computing components.
Therefore, the additional limitations are not a “practical application.” Additionally, it is not “something more” because the limitations include a well-understood, routine, and conventional activity that cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP § 2106.05(d), and Sakuta et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0200283 A1 and Paralikar et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0116726 A1.
Therefore, these claims are not patent eligible.
101 Analysis – Dependent Claims
Regarding claims 2-5, 17-18, 33, and 39, these claims do not include any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, when considered individually or as a whole. These claims further define the abstract idea by defining the type of information received and the information stored in a bundle.
Therefore, this is not a “practical application.” Additionally, this is not “something more” because it is a well-understood, routine, and conventional activity that cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP § 2106.05(d) and Sakuta et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0200283 A1 and Paralikar et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0116726 A1.
Therefore, these claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding claims 6-8 and 37, these claims do not include any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, when considered individually or as a whole. These claims recite the processors interfacing with controllers, which are generic computing components merely used as a tool to perform the abstract idea. See MPEP § 2106.05(f).
Therefore, this is not a “practical application.” Additionally, this is not “something more” because it is a well-understood, routine, and conventional activity that cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP § 2106.05(d) and Sakuta et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0200283 A1 and Paralikar et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0116726 A1.
Therefore, these claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding claims 11-12 and 38, these claims do not include any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, when considered individually or as a whole. These claims further define the abstract idea by determining operation parameters and a path plan based on received information. For example, a human operator can observe information and mentally determine what route and tasks should be completed by the agricultural vehicle.
Therefore, this is not a “practical application.” Additionally, this is not “something more” because it is a well-understood, routine, and conventional activity that cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP § 2106.05(d) and Sakuta et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0200283 A1 and Paralikar et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0116726 A1.
Therefore, these claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding claims 13-14, 32, and 34-36, these claims do not include any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, when considered individually or as a whole. These claims further define the abstract idea by defining how operation refinements are generated. For example, a human operator can mentally determine operation modifications based on observing information, and the human operator can provide an input for the refinement. The human operator can also determine operation modifications based on selecting a sensor that should be utilized, and ensuring the agricultural vehicle operates within the limits of the selected sensor.
Therefore, this is not a “practical application.” Additionally, this is not “something more” because it is a well-understood, routine, and conventional activity that cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP § 2106.05(d) and Sakuta et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0200283 A1 and Paralikar et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0116726 A1.
Therefore, these claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding claims 15-16, these claims do not include any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, when considered individually or as a whole. These claims further recite storing information in a memory and receiving information selections from a memory. The courts have recognized storing and retrieving information in memory as well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II).
Therefore, this is not a “practical application.” Additionally, this is not “something more” because it is a well-understood, routine, and conventional activity that cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP § 2106.05(d) and Sakuta et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0200283 A1.
Therefore, these claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding claims 9-10, 19-29, and 31:
Claims 9, 19, and 31 have been found to be patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 due to the recitation of “control the operation of each of the agricultural vehicle and the agricultural implement.” Claims 10 and 20-29 are patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 based on their dependency to claims 9 and 19, respectively.
Claim Interpretation
The term “bundle” is being interpreted as information or characteristics associated with the given type of “bundle,” as supported by definitions provided in instant application page 5, lines 19-26 and page 16, lines 6-9.
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.
(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 1-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sakuta et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0200283 A1 (hereinafter Sakuta).
Regarding claim 1, Sakuta discloses an autonomous agricultural assembly configurator (Sakuta Fig. 1) comprising:
one or more processors configured to (see at least Sakuta [0083]: “The controller 51 includes a CPU (or a microcomputer), one or more volatile memories, and one or more nonvolatile memories.”):
receive characteristic bundle inputs including: a field characteristic bundle associated with a field (see at least Sakuta [0086]: “The agricultural field registrar 51a registers information relating to agricultural field(s) in which agricultural job(s) is/are to be performed by the agricultural machine 1 and working device(s) 2. The area definer 51b defines predetermined area(s) in the agricultural field registered by the agricultural field registrar 51a.”);
an implement characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural implement (see at least Sakuta [0100]: “The working device keys B36a to B36d indicate preregistered representative information specific to respective working devices 2. The representative information specific to a working device 2 includes the name of the working device 2, the presence or absence of previous job(s) performed by the working device 2, and work width.”);
and a vehicle characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural vehicle (see at least Sakuta [0097]: “The type of agricultural machine 1 includes vehicle type and control type. In FIG. 5A, the preregistered (preset) type of agricultural machine 1 is displayed on the “confirm vehicle settings” screen D4a.”);
and generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs including (see at least Sakuta [0145]: “Upon selection of the “next” key B9 by the user on the “confirm automatic operation settings” screen D9, the controller 51 causes the internal memory to store the automatic operation/work information including the job settings displayed on the screen D9, and causes the display operation interface 52 to display a “travel control” screen D8 as illustrated in FIG. 11. The controller 51 generates automatic travel data based on the settings information stored in the internal memory, and transmits (outputs) the automatic travel data to the controller 60 of the agricultural machine 1 via the communicator 54. The automatic travel data includes route information, the type of working device 2, and the automatic operation/work information.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation an autonomous configuration profile includes automatic operation settings):
determining the autonomous agricultural operation based on the implement characteristic bundle (see at least Sakuta [0095]: “The job keys B31 to B35 indicate agricultural jobs that can be performed by the agricultural machine 1 and working device(s) 2 linked to the agricultural machine 1.”);
and determining operation parameters for the autonomous agricultural operation based on one or more of the implement characteristic bundle or the vehicle characteristic bundle (see at least Sakuta [0117]: “The setting items on the “route creation 2” screen D7 indicate settings for use in creating a travel route and also job settings for use in performing the agricultural job with the agricultural machine 1 and the working device 2 on the agricultural field.”).
Regarding claim 2, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein the field characteristic bundle includes one or more field characteristics of the field including field boundaries, obstacle locations, crop characteristics, or crop row spacing (see at least Sakuta [0094]: “The user performs predetermined action(s) on the agricultural field registration screen to input agricultural field information such as the position, outline, identification information, and/or the like of an agricultural field. The controller 51 registers the agricultural field information inputted via the agricultural field registration screen by causing the memory 53 to store the agricultural field information in a predetermined area thereof.”).
Regarding claim 3, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein the implement characteristic bundle includes one or more implement characteristics of the agricultural implement including implement weight, implement dimensions, tool characteristics, hitch characteristics, implement sensor characteristics, or implement actuator characteristics (see at least Sakuta [0103]: “As illustrated in FIG. 5C, the size information of the working device 2 includes the total width, work width, total length, and work position of the working device 2.”).
Regarding claim 4, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein the vehicle characteristic bundle includes one or more vehicle characteristics of the agricultural vehicle including vehicle dimensions, turning radius, engine characteristics, motor characteristics, pump characteristics, transmission characteristics, ground engaging element spacing, hitch characteristics, vehicle sensor characteristics, or vehicle actuator characteristics (see at least Sakuta [0143]: “The automatic operation/work information includes the rotation speed of the engine (prime mover 4) during the agricultural job, the vehicle speed of the traveling vehicle body 3 performing the agricultural job, the vehicle speed of the traveling vehicle body 3 making a turn, PTO speed stage, turn mode, the accuracy of matching between the traveling vehicle body 3 and the travel route L1 when entering the travel route L1, and/or the like.”).
Regarding claim 5, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein the received characteristic bundle inputs include one or more of: the field characteristic bundle associated with the field includes the field characteristic bundle associated with a specified field of a plurality of different fields; the implement characteristic bundle associated with the agricultural implement includes the implement characteristic bundle associated with a specified agricultural implement of a plurality of different agricultural implements; or the vehicle characteristic bundle associated with the agricultural vehicle includes the vehicle characteristic bundle associated with a specified agricultural vehicle of a plurality of different agricultural vehicles (see at least Sakuta [0100]: “The working device keys B36a to B36d indicate preregistered representative information specific to respective working devices 2. The representative information specific to a working device 2 includes the name of the working device 2, the presence or absence of previous job(s) performed by the working device 2, and work width. The work width refers to the dimension of the workable portion of the working device 2 perpendicular to the direction of travel in a horizontal plane. In FIG. 5B, four working device keys B36a to B36d are displayed. If the number of working devices 2 registered in the agricultural assistance apparatus 50 is five or more, the controller 51 causes working device key(s) indicating another working device(s) 2 to be displayed on the “select working device” screen D4b upon selection of the up-pointing arrow key B41 or the down-pointing arrow key B42 by the user.”; Sakuta discloses at least the implement characteristic bundle associated with the agricultural implement includes the implement characteristic bundle associated with a specified agricultural implement of a plurality of different agricultural implements).
Regarding claim 6, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein the one or more processors is configured to interface with a vehicle controller of the agricultural vehicle (see at least Sakuta [0145]: “The controller 51 generates automatic travel data based on the settings information stored in the internal memory, and transmits (outputs) the automatic travel data to the controller 60 of the agricultural machine 1 via the communicator 54.”).
Regarding claim 7, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 6,
wherein the one or more processors is configured to interface with an implement controller of the agricultural implement (see at least Sakuta [0071]: “The automatic operation controller 61 communicates with the working device 2 via the in-vehicle network Ni. Specifically, the working device 2 includes a controller 2a and a communicator 2b.”).
Regarding claim 8, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein the one or more processors is distinct from a vehicle controller and an implement controller of the agricultural vehicle and implement, respectively (see at least Sakuta [0085]: “The controller 51 communicates with the controller 60, the manual operator 62, the positioning device 40, the warner 63, the detector 64, and the working device 2 through the communicator 54 via the in-vehicle network Ni.”; Sakuta Fig. 1 shows controller 51 is distinct from controller 60 and controller 2a).
Regarding claim 9, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein the one or more processors is configured to control the operation of each of the agricultural vehicle and the agricultural implement according to the autonomous configuration profile of the autonomous agricultural operation (see at least Sakuta [0145]: “Upon selection of the “next” key B9 by the user on the “confirm automatic operation settings” screen D9, the controller 51 causes the internal memory to store the automatic operation/work information including the job settings displayed on the screen D9, and causes the display operation interface 52 to display a “travel control” screen D8 as illustrated in FIG. 11. The controller 51 generates automatic travel data based on the settings information stored in the internal memory, and transmits (outputs) the automatic travel data to the controller 60 of the agricultural machine 1 via the communicator 54.”; [0143]: “The automatic operation/work information includes job setting(s) for the agricultural job performed by the working device 2 while the agricultural machine 1 operates automatically. The automatic operation/work information includes the rotation speed of the engine (prime mover 4) during the agricultural job, the vehicle speed of the traveling vehicle body 3 performing the agricultural job, the vehicle speed of the traveling vehicle body 3 making a turn, PTO speed stage, turn mode, the accuracy of matching between the traveling vehicle body 3 and the travel route L1 when entering the travel route L1, and/or the like. Preregistered automatic operation/work information is displayed on the “confirm automatic operation settings” screen D9 in FIG. 10.”).
Regarding claim 10, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 9, wherein controlling the operation of each of the agricultural vehicle and the agricultural implement includes:
receiving sensor inputs from sensors of one or more of the agricultural vehicle or the agricultural implement based on the autonomous configuration profile (see at least Sakuta [0081]: “The detector 64 includes sensor(s) and/or the like (which may include camera(s)) provided at some position(s) on the agricultural machine 1 and/or the working device 2. The detector 64 detects the operating states (driven or stopped state, current position, and/or the like) of respective elements of the agricultural machine 1 such as the transmission 5, the brake 6, the traveling device 7, the lifting device 8, the steering unit 29, and/or the manual operator 62 based on signal(s) outputted from the sensor(s) and/or the like. The detector 64 also detects the operating state of the working device 2 based on signal(s) outputted from the sensor(s) and/or the like.”);
and operating one or more actuators of one or more of the agricultural vehicle or the agricultural implement based on the autonomous configuration profile (see at least Sakuta [0070]: “The automatic operation controller 61 controls driving of the transmission 5 by electrically controlling the switching position and the opening of the control valve 37. The transmission 5 transmits the driving force from the prime mover 4 to the traveling device 7 to actuate the traveling device 7, causing the traveling vehicle body 3 to travel forward or rearward. For example, when the working device 2 is a ground implement or the like, the transmission 5 transmits the driving force from the prime mover 4 to the working device 2.”; Sakuta Fig. 10 shows the automatic operation settings (i.e., autonomous configuration profile) includes drive settings).
Regarding claim 11, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein determining the operation parameters for the autonomous agricultural operation includes determining the operation parameters based on the implement characteristic bundle and one or more of the field or vehicle characteristic bundles (see at least Sakuta [0117]: “The setting items on the “route creation 2” screen D7 indicate settings for use in creating a travel route and also job settings for use in performing the agricultural job with the agricultural machine 1 and the working device 2 on the agricultural field.”; [0090]: “The “settings” key B0 is selected (tapped) to make settings and registration for certain items. Examples of the items include matters relating to the agricultural machine 1 provided with the agricultural assistance apparatus 50, a working device 2 linked to the agricultural machine 1, an agricultural job to be performed by the agricultural machine 1 and the working device 2, an agricultural field in which the agricultural job is to be performed, and the display operation interface 52.”).
Regarding claim 12, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1 comprising
determining a path plan for the autonomous agricultural operation based on one or more of the field, implement and vehicle characteristic bundles (see at least Sakuta [0117]: “The setting items on the “route creation 2” screen D7 indicate settings for use in creating a travel route and also job settings for use in performing the agricultural job with the agricultural machine 1 and the working device 2 on the agricultural field. The setting items include estimated work distance, the number of headlands, the number of headlands for automatic operation, working direction, overlap-on-headland, and overlap-in-central-portion. It is possible to input values of the items except for the estimated work distance. The number of headlands indicates the number of headland(s) extending inside and along the outline H1 of the registered agricultural field (agricultural field map MP2). The number of headlands for automatic operation indicates in how many of the above defined headlands the agricultural job is performed by the working device 2 while the agricultural machine 1 travels in automatic operation (how many times the agricultural machine 1 runs around the central area C1 in automatic operation).”).
Regarding claim 13, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1, wherein generating the autonomous configuration profile according to the received characteristic bundle inputs includes:
generating one or more operation refinements of the autonomous agricultural operation according to one or more of the field, implement or vehicle characteristic bundles (see at least Sakuta [0180]: “The notification U2 displays a message indicating that the size information of the working device 2 has been updated and that the travel route L1 based on which the agricultural job is resumed is different from what it was when the agricultural job was interrupted, and asking whether such a different travel route L1 is acceptable to the user.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation a refinement according to an implement characteristic includes an update according to a working device size).
Regarding claim 14, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1, wherein generating the autonomous configuration profile according to the received characteristic bundle inputs includes:
generating one or more operation refinements through human operator queries (see at least Sakuta [0104]: “The settings keys B37 to B39 are each used to set and change the size information or the type of the working device 2…The user can input a different value of the total width or the work width into an input field K1 for the total width or an input field K2 for the work width, by selecting the input field K1 or the input field K2 and then operating (taping) a plus sign key B45 or a minus sign key B46 to move a cursor K12 on a scale K11 leftward or rightward.”).
Regarding claim 15, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors includes a characteristic memory including:
a plurality of field characteristic bundles associated with a respective plurality of fields including the field characteristic bundle of the field (see at least Sakuta [0110]: “The “select agricultural field” screen D5 displays one or more registered agricultural field maps MP2, an up-pointing arrow key B41, a down-pointing arrow key B42, a “next” key B9, and a “back” key B8. The number of the registered agricultural field maps MP2 displayed in FIG. 6 is three. If the number of the registered agricultural field maps MP2 is four or more, the controller 51 causes another agricultural field map(s) MP2 to be displayed on the “select agricultural field” screen D5 upon selection of the up-pointing arrow key B41 or the down-pointing arrow key B42 by the user.”);
a plurality of implement characteristic bundles associated with a respective plurality of agricultural implements including the implement characteristic bundle of the agricultural implement (see at least Sakuta [0100]: “The working device keys B36a to B36d indicate preregistered representative information specific to respective working devices 2. The representative information specific to a working device 2 includes the name of the working device 2, the presence or absence of previous job(s) performed by the working device 2, and work width. The work width refers to the dimension of the workable portion of the working device 2 perpendicular to the direction of travel in a horizontal plane. In FIG. 5B, four working device keys B36a to B36d are displayed. If the number of working devices 2 registered in the agricultural assistance apparatus 50 is five or more, the controller 51 causes working device key(s) indicating another working device(s) 2 to be displayed on the “select working device” screen D4b upon selection of the up-pointing arrow key B41 or the down-pointing arrow key B42 by the user.”);
and a plurality of vehicle characteristic bundles associated with respective plurality of agricultural vehicles including the vehicle characteristic bundle of the agricultural vehicle (see at least Sakuta [0097]-[0098]: “The “confirm vehicle settings” screen D4a as illustrated in FIG. 5A displays a message indicating instructions for input operations, the category of the agricultural job, the type of agricultural machine 1, an “unattended vehicle settings” key B10, an “attended vehicle settings” key B11, a “next” key B9, and a “back” key B8. Note that the user can input the type of agricultural machine 1 by, for example, selecting the “settings” key B0 on the home screen D1 (FIG. 3) and performing predetermined input operation(s) on the display operation interface 52. In so doing, the user can also input the specifications such as the name and/or the size of the agricultural machine 1 by performing predetermined input operation(s). Upon the user's further predetermined input operation(s), the controller 51 registers the inputted type and specifications of the agricultural machine 1 by causing the memory 53 to store them in a predetermined area thereof.”).
Regarding claim 16, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 15,
wherein receiving characteristic bundle inputs includes receiving selections of the field, the agricultural implement, and the agricultural vehicle from the characteristic memory (see at least Sakuta [0094]: “The controller 51 registers the agricultural field information inputted via the agricultural field registration screen by causing the memory 53 to store the agricultural field information in a predetermined area thereof.”; [0109]: “Upon selection of the “next” key B9 by the user on the “confirm working device settings” screen D4c, the controller 51 causes the internal memory to store the settings information (the name, size information, and type of the working device 2, and the presence/absence of previous job(s) performed by the working device 2) displayed on the “confirm working device settings” screen D4c, and causes the display operation interface 52 to display a “select agricultural field” screen D5 as illustrated in FIG. 6.”; [0098]: “Upon the user's further predetermined input operation(s), the controller 51 registers the inputted type and specifications of the agricultural machine 1 by causing the memory 53 to store them in a predetermined area thereof.”).
Regarding claim 17, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors includes a characteristic investigator configured to:
identify characteristics associated with one or more of the field, agricultural implement, or the agricultural vehicle; and collect one or more characteristics from the identified characteristics into the field, implement or vehicle characteristic bundles (see at least Sakuta [0162]: “The recorder 51e may record (store), in a predetermined area of the memory 53 as a work history, the settings information of the agricultural machine 1, the settings information of the working device 2, the settings information of the agricultural field (information of the agricultural field map MP2 selected on the screen D5 in FIG. 6), job settings (settings information on the screen D6 in FIG. 7, the screen D7 in the drawings such as FIG. 8A, and the screen D9 in FIG. 10), and route information (the areas C1 and E1, the travel route L1, and the positions Ps and Pg on the screen D7 in FIG. 8B and the screen D8 in FIG. 11) stored in the internal memory of the controller 51 such that these pieces of information are associated with the identification information of the agricultural machine 1 and the identification information of the working device 2. In such a case, the work history may include the start date and time and/or the end date and time of the agricultural job performed by the agricultural machine 1 and the working device 2 based on the travel route L1 in the automatic traveling-and-working mode.”).
Regarding claim 18, Sakuta discloses the configurator of claim 1,
wherein two or more of the field, vehicle, or implement characteristic bundles are included in a composite characteristic bundle (see at least Sakuta [0168]: “The recorder 51e also overwrites the information indicative of the presence or absence of previous job, which is included in the specific information included in the updated settings information of the working device 2, with “Previous job: Yes”. The recorder 51e may record, in a predetermined area of the memory 53 as a work history, the settings information of the agricultural machine 1, the settings information of the working device 2, the settings information of the agricultural field, the job setting(s), and the route information stored in the internal memory of the controller 51 such that these pieces of information are associated with the identification information of the agricultural machine 1 and the identification information of the working device 2.”).
Regarding claim 19, this claim recites an autonomous agricultural assembly configurator and controller comprising the elements of claim 1 and claim 9. Sakuta also discloses the claimed autonomous agricultural assembly configurator and controller (Sakuta Fig. 1), as outlined in the rejections to claims 1 and 9 above. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same rationale as claims 1 and 9.
Regarding claim 20, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claim 10 as explained above. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 10.
Regarding claim 21, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claims 11-12 as explained above. Therefore, claim 21 is rejected for the same rationale as claims 11-12.
Regarding claim 22, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claims 2-4 as explained above. Therefore, claim 22 is rejected for the same rationale as claims 2-4.
Regarding claim 23, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claim 5 as explained above. Therefore, claim 23 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 5.
Regarding claim 24, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claims 6-7 as explained above. Therefore, claim 24 is rejected for the same rationale as claims 6-7.
Regarding claim 25, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claim 8 as explained above. Therefore, claim 25 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 8.
Regarding claim 26, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claim 13 as explained above. Therefore, claim 26 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 13.
Regarding claim 27, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claim 14 as explained above. Therefore, claim 27 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 14.
Regarding claim 28, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claim 17 as explained above. Therefore, claim 28 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 17.
Regarding claim 29, this claim recites a configurator and controller similar to the configurator of claim 18 as explained above. Therefore, claim 29 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 18.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 30-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakuta in view of Paralikar et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0116726 A1 (hereinafter Paralikar).
Regarding claim 30, Sakuta discloses an autonomous agricultural assembly configurator (Sakuta Fig. 1) comprising:
one or more processors configured to (see at least Sakuta [0083]: “The controller 51 includes a CPU (or a microcomputer), one or more volatile memories, and one or more nonvolatile memories.”):
receive characteristic bundle inputs including: a field characteristic bundle associated with a field (see at least Sakuta [0086]: “The agricultural field registrar 51a registers information relating to agricultural field(s) in which agricultural job(s) is/are to be performed by the agricultural machine 1 and working device(s) 2. The area definer 51b defines predetermined area(s) in the agricultural field registered by the agricultural field registrar 51a.”);
an implement characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural implement (see at least Sakuta [0100]: “The working device keys B36a to B36d indicate preregistered representative information specific to respective working devices 2. The representative information specific to a working device 2 includes the name of the working device 2, the presence or absence of previous job(s) performed by the working device 2, and work width.”);
and a vehicle characteristic bundle associated with an agricultural vehicle (see at least Sakuta [0097]: “The type of agricultural machine 1 includes vehicle type and control type. In FIG. 5A, the preregistered (preset) type of agricultural machine 1 is displayed on the “confirm vehicle settings” screen D4a.”);
generate an autonomous configuration profile for an autonomous agricultural operation according to the received characteristic bundle inputs (see at least Sakuta [0145]: “Upon selection of the “next” key B9 by the user on the “confirm automatic operation settings” screen D9, the controller 51 causes the internal memory to store the automatic operation/work information including the job settings displayed on the screen D9, and causes the display operation interface 52 to display a “travel control” screen D8 as illustrated in FIG. 11. The controller 51 generates automatic travel data based on the settings information stored in the internal memory, and transmits (outputs) the automatic travel data to the controller 60 of the agricultural machine 1 via the communicator 54. The automatic travel data includes route information, the type of working device 2, and the automatic operation/work information.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation an autonomous configuration profile includes automatic operation settings);
and generate one or more operation refinements (see at least Sakuta [0180]: “The notification U2 displays a message indicating that the size information of the working device 2 has been updated and that the travel route L1 based on which the agricultural job is resumed is different from what it was when the agricultural job was interrupted, and asking whether such a different travel route L1 is acceptable to the user.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation a refinement includes an update),
Sakuta fails to expressly disclose refinement parameters including sensor thresholds associated with available sensors included in the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles. However, Paralikar teaches
the one or more operation refinements having refinement parameters including: one or more sensor thresholds associated with available sensors included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles (see at least Paralikar [0048]: “In one example, sensors 238 illustratively provide a signal that is indicative of the presence of an overspray condition. Furthermore, sensor signals from sensors 238 may also indicate an amount of (e.g., a proportion, a weight or size, or otherwise indicative of an amount of) sensed material (liquid, particulate, etc.) that is being sensed. These signals can be provided over UAV links 161 to overspray detection system 166 to detect a presence of an overspray condition as will be discussed later. However, overspray detection system 166 can detect the overspray condition in a variety of different ways, such as when a threshold amount of moisture or particulate matter or chemical is detected by one or more of sensors 238.”; [0055]: “Where sensors 238 are mounted on UAVs 124-126 or UGVs, logic 272 controls UAVs 124-126 or UGVs to follow sprayer 272, positioning themselves in any monitor areas where an overspray condition is likely to happen, that may be detected by monitor area logic 269. When sensing devices 1000 are on ground assets (like poles) the sensors in the monitor area can be activated and read.”);
and one or more actions associated with available actuators included in one or more of the implement or vehicle characteristic bundles, the one or more actions linked with the one or more sensor thresholds and sensors (see at least Paralikar [0064]: “In one example, control signal generator logic 266 can generate control signals to control the sensors to perform overspray operations. For example, it can control the UAVs 124-126 (or telescoping poles that hold the sensors) to change elevations or locations to determine whether the substance being sprayed is detected in the monitor area at higher or lower elevations, is detected at a position further from the field boundary, etc. Additionally, sprayer control signal generator logic 296 can receive the overspray detection signal 318 indicating a presence of an overspray condition and can subsequently generate one or more control signals to modify an operating characteristic of controllable subsystems 236 and/or 184.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system disclosed by Sakuta with Paralikar with reasonable expectation of success. Paralikar is directed towards the related field of sensing overspray of an agricultural machine. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Sakuta with Paralikar to detect undesirable conditions that are difficult to observe using only the human eye (see at least Paralikar [0005]: “It may be undesirable for the substance being sprayed by a sprayer to cross the field boundaries onto an adjacent piece of land. This can be extremely difficult to detect. For instance, some substances are visible with the human eye. Therefore, if a relatively large amount of the substance has passed the field boundary of the field being treated, it can be discerned by human sight. However, other substances are dispersed or sprayed in droplets or granule sizes that are too small to be observed by the human eye. It can thus be very difficult to detect whether an overspray condition (where the spray drifts across a field boundary) has occurred.”).
Regarding claim 31, Sakuta in view of Paralikar teach all elements of the configurator according to claim 30 as explained above. Sakuta further discloses
wherein the one or more processors is configured to control the operation of each of the agricultural vehicle and the agricultural implement according to the autonomous configuration profile and the one or more operation refinements for the autonomous agricultural operation (see at least Sakuta [0145]: “Upon selection of the “next” key B9 by the user on the “confirm automatic operation settings” screen D9, the controller 51 causes the internal memory to store the automatic operation/work information including the job settings displayed on the screen D9, and causes the display operation interface 52 to display a “travel control” screen D8 as illustrated in FIG. 11. The controller 51 generates automatic travel data based on the settings information stored in the internal memory, and transmits (outputs) the automatic travel data to the controller 60 of the agricultural machine 1 via the communicator 54.”; [0143]: “The automatic operation/work information includes job setting(s) for the agricultural job performed by the working device 2 while the agricultural machine 1 operates automatically. The automatic operation/work information includes the rotation speed of the engine (prime mover 4) during the agricultural job, the vehicle speed of the traveling vehicle body 3 performing the agricultural job, the vehicle speed of the traveling vehicle body 3 making a turn, PTO speed stage, turn mode, the accuracy of matching between the traveling vehicle body 3 and the travel route L1 when entering the travel route L1, and/or the like. Preregistered automatic operation/work information is displayed on the “confirm automatic operation settings” screen D9 in FIG. 10.”; [0181]: “That is, the route creator 51c creates the travel route L1 again based on the size information of the working device 2 that was updated during the interruption of the agricultural job. Thus, the travel route L1 created again differs from what it was when the agricultural job was interrupted.”).
Regarding claim 32, this claim recites a configurator similar to the configurator of claim 13 as explained above. Therefore, claim 32 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 13.
Regarding claim 33, this claim recites a configurator similar to the configurator of claim 5 as explained above. Therefore, claim 33 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 5.
Regarding claim 34, Sakuta in view of Paralikar teach all elements of the configurator according to claim 33 as explained above. Paralikar further teaches
wherein generating the one or more operation refinements includes selecting one or more available sensors or available actuators of the specified agricultural implement or specified agricultural vehicle (see at least Paralikar [0074]: “If monitor area logic 269 identifies a monitor area that should be monitored for overspray (as indicated by block 362), then it provides a signal indicating this to sensor deployment logic 270, which deploys UAVs 124-126 to sensor locations, or which can activate or obtain sensor readings from other sensing devices 1000, in the monitor area that was identified.”).
Regarding claim 35, Sakuta in view of Paralikar teach all elements of the configurator according to claim 34 as explained above. Paralikar further teaches
wherein generating the one or more operation refinements includes selecting refinement parameters according to the selected one or more available sensors or available actuators (see at least Paralikar [0074]: “If monitor area logic 269 identifies a monitor area that should be monitored for overspray (as indicated by block 362), then it provides a signal indicating this to sensor deployment logic 270, which deploys UAVs 124-126 to sensor locations, or which can activate or obtain sensor readings from other sensing devices 1000, in the monitor area that was identified.”).
Regarding claim 36, this claim recites a configurator similar to the configurator of claim 14 as explained above. Therefore, claim 36 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 14.
Regarding claim 37, this claim recites a configurator similar to the configurator of claim 8 as explained above. Therefore, claim 37 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 8.
Regarding claim 38, this claim recites a configurator similar to the configurator of claims 11-12 as explained above. Therefore, claim 38 is rejected for the same rationale as claims 11-12.
Regarding claim 39, this claim recites a configurator similar to the configurator of claim 18 as explained above. Therefore, claim 39 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nishii et al., U.S. Patent No. 12527244 B2, directed towards determining a recommended traveling line for a work vehicle.
Tamatani, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0068172 A1, directed towards changing control parameters based on deviation exceeding a threshold.
Ingalls et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0407285 A1, directed towards determining agricultural vehicle settings based on parameters and user input.
Takahashi et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0096137 A1, directed towards displaying information regarding work vehicle operations and allowing a user to make a selection.
Nishida et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0413491 A1, directed towards a management system for a plurality of work vehicles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J SLOWIK whose telephone number is (571)270-5608. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI: 0900-1700.
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, ANISS CHAD can be reached at (571)270-3832. 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.
/ELIZABETH J SLOWIK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662