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 .
Introduction
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in this application and are subject to examination herein.
Information Disclosure Statements
The two (2) information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/15/2024 and 02/23/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 8-10, 13-16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by European Pat. Pub. No. EP 3 659 424 A1 to Garland et al. (hereinafter Garland) (cited by Applicant in IDS filed on 02/23/2026).
Regarding claim 1, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) for an agricultural harvester (agricultural vehicle 100) (Abstract; Fig. 1; Paras. [0014]-[0015]), comprising:
a controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) comprising a memory (Para. [0027]) and a processor (Para. [0027]), wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to:
identify termination of a row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]); and
control a deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]) to transition a pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) of a row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) to an operational spacing in response to identifying termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]).
Regarding claim 2, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to identify termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]) in response to determining a corn header (header 120) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0014]-[0026]) of the agricultural harvester (agricultural vehicle 100) (Abstract; Fig. 1; Paras. [0014]-[0015]) is in a working position (work position) (Para. [0024]).
Regarding claim 3, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to identify termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]) in response to determining a pair of feed rollers (crop or snap rollers 220) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017]) of the row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) is rotating in a forward direction.
Regarding claim 6, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to:
identify initiation of the row unit cleaning process (step 408) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]); and
control the deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]) to transition a pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) of a row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) to a cleaning spacing in response to identifying initiation of the row unit cleaning process (step 408) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]).
Regarding claim 8, Garland discloses a method for controlling a spacing between a pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) of a row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) of an agricultural harvester (agricultural vehicle 100) (Abstract; Fig. 1; Paras. [0014]-[0015]), comprising:
identifying, via a controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) comprising a memory (Para. [0027]) and a processor (Para. [0027]), termination of a row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]); and
controlling, via the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]), a deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]) to transition the pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) to an operational spacing in response to identifying termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]).
Regarding claim 9, Garland discloses the method of claim 8 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a method wherein identifying termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]) comprises determining a corn header (header 120) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0014]-[0026]) of the agricultural harvester (agricultural vehicle 100) (Abstract; Fig. 1; Paras. [0014]-[0015]) is in a working position (work position) (Para. [0024]).
Regarding claim 10, Garland discloses the method of claim 8 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a method wherein identifying termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]) comprises determining a pair of feed rollers (crop or snap rollers 220) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017]) of the row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) is rotating in a forward direction.
Regarding claim 13, Garland discloses the method of claim 8 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a method comprising:
identifying, via the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]), initiation of the row unit cleaning process (step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]); and
controlling, via the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]), the deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]) to transition the pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) of the row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) to a cleaning spacing in response to identifying initiation of the row unit cleaning process (step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]).
Regarding claim 14, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) for an agricultural harvester (agricultural vehicle 100) (Abstract; Fig. 1; Paras. [0014]-[0015]), comprising:
a deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]) configured to control spacing between a pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) of a row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) of the agricultural harvester (agricultural vehicle 100) (Abstract; Fig. 1; Paras. [0014]-[0015]); and
a controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) communicatively coupled to the deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]), wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to:
identify termination of a row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]); and
control the deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]) to transition the pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) to an operational spacing in response to identifying termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]).
Regarding claim 15, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 14 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to identify termination of the row unit cleaning process (e.g., termination of step 208) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]) in response to determining a corn header (header 120) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0014]-[0026]) of the agricultural harvester (agricultural vehicle 100) (Abstract; Fig. 1; Paras. [0014]-[0015]) is in a working position (work position) (Para. [0024]).
Regarding claim 16, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 14 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to identify termination of the row unit cleaning process in response to determining a pair of feed rollers (crop or snap rollers 220) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017]) of the row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) is rotating in a forward direction.
Regarding claim 19, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 14 (see above). Furthermore, Garland discloses a deck plate control system (deck plate adjustment system 300) (Fig. 3; Para. [0021]) wherein the controller (controller 310) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0021]-[0027]) is configured to:
identify initiation of the row unit cleaning process (step 408) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]); and
control the deck plate actuator (actuator(s) 230) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0020]-[0022], [0024]-[0025]) to transition the pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 210) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0017], [0019]-[0022], [0024]-[0026]) of the row unit (row unit 128) (Figs. 2-3; Paras. [0016]-[0017], [0019]-[0020]) to a cleaning spacing in response to identifying initiation of the row unit cleaning process (step 408) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0021], [0024], [0026]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4-5, 7, 11-12, 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garland in view of European Pat. Pub. No. EP 4 353 068 to Helms et al. (hereinafter Helms) (cited by Applicant in IDS filed on 02/23/2026).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 17, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 1, the method of claim 4 and the deck plate control system of claim 14, respectively (see above). However, Garland does not expressly disclose that the controller is configured to determine the operational spacing based on feedback from a deck plate spacing sensor while the row unit is in operation. Nevertheless, Helms teaches a deck plate control system comprising a controller (controller 235) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0025]-[0028]) is configured to determine the operational spacing based on feedback from a deck plate spacing sensor (deck plate position sensor 280) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0028]) while the row unit is in operation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the deck plate control system disclosed in Garland with the deck plate spacing sensor taught in Helms with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide positive feedback to the system to know the deck plate gap width rather than relying upon the operation parameters of a hydraulic actuator to estimate the dec plate gap width. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the deck plate control system disclosed in Garland with the deck plate spacing sensor taught in Helms with a reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 18, Garland in view of Helms teaches the deck plate control system of claim 4, the method of claim 11 and the deck plate control system of claim 17, respectively (see above). Furthermore, Helms teaches that the controller (controller 235) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0025]-[0028]) is configured to control a user interface (operator interface mechanism(s) 318, remote user interface(s) 364) (Fig. 4; Paras. [0023], [0029], [0034], [0041]-[0042]) to present a current spacing between the pair of deck plates (pair of deck plates 1226) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0024], [0028]) based on the feedback from the deck plate spacing sensor (deck plate position sensor 280) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0028]).
Claim(s) 7 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garland in view of European Pat. Pub. No. EP 3 427 570 to Pollklas et al. (hereinafter Pollklas).
Regarding claim 7 and claim 20, Garland discloses the deck plate control system of claim 6 and claim 19, respectively (see above). However, Garland does not expressly disclose that the controller is configured to identify initiation of the row unit cleaning process in response to determining a pair of feed rollers of the row unit is rotating in a rearward direction. Nevertheless, Pollklas teaches a corn header wherein a controller (control device 12) (Fig. 1; Col. 4, lines 4-15; col. 4, line 31 to col. 5, line 9) causes a feed roller (feed rollers 5a, 5b) (Fig. 1; Col. 4, lines 4-15; col. 4, line 31 to col. 5, line 9) to reverse (rotate in a rearward direction) when it detects a clog, blockage or foreign body (Col. 4, line 31 to col. 5, line 9). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the deck plate control system disclosed in Garland with the ability to detect a clog, blockage or foreign body taught in Pollklas and utilize that as an indicator to initiate the row unit cleaning process with a reasonable expectation of success in order to clear the blockage from the feed rollers and the deck plate gap. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the deck plate control system disclosed in Garland with the ability to detect a clog, blockage or foreign body taught in Pollklas and utilize that as an indicator to initiate the row unit cleaning process with a reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
CONCLUSION
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,820,438 to Barry; 5,680,750 to Stefl; 6,237,312 to Becker; 5,060,464 to Caron; 6,226,969 to Becker; 9,320,196 to Dybro et al.; 9,635,811 to Ricketts et al.; 11,785,890 to Verhoef et al.; and U.S. Pat. Pub. Nos. 2024/0215483 to Advani et al.; and 2019/0090425 to Ricketts are related to adjustment of corn header stripper/deck plates. U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2025/0359511 to Clark et al. relates to controlling an agricultural header having adjustable deck plates with a position/spacing sensor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAUDE J BROWN whose telephone number is (571)270-5924. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8AM-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, Joseph M. Rocca can be reached at (571) 272-8971. 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.
/CLAUDE J BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights