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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of a minor grammatical informality. Claim 10 as presented includes “wherein the one or more controllers are be configured to… .” The term “be” is recognized as a typographical error. Applicant is advised to amend the claim to read as “wherein the one or more controllers are configured to… .”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 2-18 include the recitation of “a control system of” the claim upon which they are dependent. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims as the independent claim 1 introduces “a control system”, and it is thus considered indefinite whether the control systems in the dependent claims are referring to the same control system as introduced previously. Antecedent basis is similarly found to be lacking for various other terms in the dependent claims that were introduced in a preceding claim, including but not limited to: “a crop content measure” and “a crop size measure” in claim 10, despite their introduction in claim 1; “an appropriate adjustment” and “a crop processing metric” in claim 12, despite their introduction in claims 1 and 10; and the two "a crop processing metric thresholds" in claim 14, where it is unclear if they are referring to the same or different thresholds.
Appropriate correction is required. When referring to terms introduced previously in the claim or in a preceding claim, it is recommended to use the term “the” rather than “a/an” to clearly refer to the same term as previously introduced, or to use the term(s) “first” and/or second” as delineating terms to clearly distinguish between the claimed components.
Claims 5 and 8 are additionally rejected for their usage of the word “optionally” as it is indefinite whether the metes and bounds of the claims require the limitations that are considered to be optional, namely the crop material of claim 5 including “one or more of a dry matter content, a fiber content, protein content, fat content, ash content and/or sugar content,” and the object recognition process of claim 8 performing the “identifying [of] one or more properties thereof including a measure of one or more dimensions of the identified crop material components.”
It is recognized that these limitations have been considered as part of the metes and bounds of the claimed invention for the purposes of the rejections over prior art as found below.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bonefas et al. (US 20200128735 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bonefas teaches a control system for controlling operation of an agricultural harvesting machine, the control system comprising one or more controllers (see Fig. 2: control and processing systems 164 and 166 comprises controllers 176, 178, etc.), and being configured to:
receive first sensor data from a first sensor operably coupled, in use, to the harvesting machine, the first sensor data being indicative of a crop content measure ([0034]: ”receives sensor signals indicative of the reflected radiation from sensor 138 and processes those signals to obtain crop properties”);
receive second sensor data from a second sensor operably coupled, in use, to the harvesting machine, the second sensor data being indicative of a crop size measure ([0035-0036]: image is captured and processed to determine crop “size distribution”);
compute a crop processing metric in dependence on the first and second sensor data ([0036-0038] and [0054]: crop metrics such as CSPS are determined and adjusted based on size distribution from the crop size measure and moisture from the crop content measure); and
generate and output one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more operable components of or otherwise associated with the agricultural harvesting machine in dependence on the processing metric ([0041]: metrics are evaluated to “generate control signals to adjust any operating subsystems on forage harvester”).
Regarding claim 2, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the crop processing metric comprises a processing score for the crop material indicative of a level of processing applied to the crop material by the harvesting machine, or by one or more components of a crop processing apparatus of the harvesting machine ([0007], [0036], and [0041]: metrics include corn silage processing score (CSPS), a well-known score indicative of the processing of the corn silage).
Regarding claim 3, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the first sensor comprises a spectroscopic sensor ([0034]: “near infrared sensor”).
Regarding claim 4, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the first sensor comprises an infrared sensor ([0034]: “near infrared sensor”).
Regarding claim 5, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the crop content measure comprises a measure of one or more properties of the crop material, optionally including one or more of a dry matter content, a fiber content, protein content, fat content, ash content and/or sugar content ([0034]: properties include “moisture, starch content, acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber, among other things”).
Regarding claim 6, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the crop content measure comprises a measure of a starch content of the crop material ([0034]: properties include “starch content”).
Regarding claim 7, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the second sensor comprises an optical sensor configured to obtain image data ([0035]: imaging device 140);
and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to receive and analyze image data from the second sensor for identifying crop material components within the image data ([0036]: “The image captured by imaging device 140 is then transferred to image processing system 166”).
Regarding claim 8, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more controllers are configured to perform an object recognition process on image data received from the second sensor for identifying individual crop material components within the image data ([0036]: filters out other material so as to identify kernels), and
optionally identifying one or more properties thereof including a measure of one or more dimensions of the identified crop material components ([0036]: size identified so that much smaller or larger fragments are removed, and a size distribution determined).
Regarding claim 9, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the first and/or second sensor are configured to be coupled, in use, to the harvesting machine at or proximal to a crop flow associated with the harvesting machine ([0027] and see Fig. 1: housing 132 includes both sensors 138 and 140 to monitor “the crop passing through chute”).
Regarding claim 10, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more controllers are be configured to compute the crop processing metric through application of an adjustment to a crop content measure as determined from the first sensor data in dependence on a crop size measure as determined from the second sensor data ([0036] and [0042]: CSPS is determined after processing adjustments to sensor data).
It is emphasized that CSPS is a well-known crop processing metric in the art as referenced in both the backgrounds of applicant’s disclosure ([0003]) and of Bonefas ([0007]). This metric measures the processing of starch in corn silage and by a “comparison of the starch content before and after sieving” ([0003] of applicant’s disclosure) which, as taught by Bonefas, is calculated by way of a division operation, with “The kernel portion that falls through a 4.75 mm sieve [being] the numerator of the CSPS, and the total kernel portion that was sieved [being] the denominator in the CSPS” ([0007]). Therefore, since this crop processing metric is CSPS according to applicant’s specification ([0043]), the claimed adjustment to a crop content measure as determined from the first sensor data in dependence on a crop size measure as determined from the second sensor data is recognized as being functionally equivalent to the operation in Bonefas as the crop processing metric CSPS is calculated by first adjusting the crop content measure, i.e. total starch, based on the crop size measure, i.e. size distribution, to produce an amount of starch that would be small enough to “fall through a 4.75 mm sieve” ([0007] of Bonefas), then performing the aforementioned division to produce the CSPS metric.
Although not relied upon in the present rejection, it is noted that Bonefas additionally teaches that the crop processing metric CSPS may be further adjusted based on crop content measures other than starch, such as moisture ([0034] and [0038]). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have alternatively recognized that the initial CSPS metric, as is dependent on the crop size measure, could be used to modify the moisture content from the crop content measure to produce an adjusted CSPS metric that is more accurate.
Regarding claim 11, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more controllers are configured to:
determine a crop size distribution for crop material identified within the second sensor data to determine a proportion of identified crop material components having a size measure which is at or smaller than a threshold size parameter ([0007] and [0036]: size distribution used to determine CSPS, which is based on the proportion of crop material smaller than 4.75 mm); and
apply the determined proportion to the crop content measure, as determined from the first sensor data to compute the crop processing metric ([0007] and [0036]: as stated previously, this is functionally equivalent to adjusting the total starch content, i.e. the denominator, to produce the amount of starch content smaller than 4.75mm, i.e. the numerator, as is necessarily part of the and well-understood calculation of CSPS).
Regarding claim 12, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the crop content measure comprises a measure of the total starch content of the crop material ([0034]: starch content detected as necessary to calculate CSPS), and
and the one or more controllers are configured to apply an appropriate adjustment based on the determined size proportion to determine a crop processing metric which is indicative of a starch content of crop material having a size measure which is at or below the predetermined threshold size parameter ([0007] and [0036]: as stated previously, this is functionally equivalent to adjusting the total starch content, i.e. the denominator, to produce the amount of starch content smaller than 4.75mm, i.e. the numerator, as is necessarily part of the and well-understood calculation of CSPS).
Regarding claim 13, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more operable components include one or more components of or otherwise associated with a crop processing apparatus of the agricultural harvesting machine ([0024]); and
wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control one or more operational parameters of the crop processing apparatus to adjust a level of processing applied thereby to crop material passing through the crop processing apparatus in dependence on the crop processing metric ([0025] and [0043-0044]: parameters such as roller gaps are adjusted based on the metric).
Regarding claim 14, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more controllers are configured to:
adjust one or more operational parameters of the crop processing apparatus to increase a level of processing applied to the crop material by the crop processing apparatus in dependence on the crop processing metric being at or below a crop processing metric threshold ([0041-0044]: CSPS being too low results in an increase in processing); and/or
adjust one or more operational parameters of the crop processing apparatus to decrease a level of processing applied to the crop material by the crop processing apparatus in dependence on the crop processing metric exceeding a crop processing metric threshold ([0041-0044]: CSPS being too high results in a decrease in processing).
Regarding claim 15, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more operable components include a processor roller or rollers ([0024]); and
wherein the one or more controllers are configured to adjust a roller gap and/or roller speed associated with the processor roller(s) in dependence on the determined crop processing metric ([0025] and [0043-0044]: roller gap and speed adjusted by their respective controllers 176 and 178).
Regarding claim 16, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more operable components include:
a cutting apparatus, and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to adjust one or more operable parameters of the cutting apparatus including an operational speed or position of one or more cutting members of the cutting apparatus ([0045]: “Subsystems 163 can also include header speed and length of cut actuators that control the header speed and length of crop cut by the header 108”, wherein control of the length of cut crop is realized by adjusting the position of the cutting apparatus);
a guidance system for the harvesting machine, and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control a forward speed of the agricultural harvesting machine in dependence on the crop processing metric ([0045]: “Also, for instance, it may be that the ground speed of harvester 100 can be increased (or decreased) based on the evaluated metrics”); and/or
a header for the harvesting machine, wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control operation of the header or one or more components thereof in dependence on the crop processing metric ([0045]: “Subsystems 163 can also include header speed and length of cut actuators that control the header speed and length of crop cut by the header 108”).
Regarding claim 17, Bonefas teaches:
wherein the one or more operable components include a user interface ([0023]), and
wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control operation of the user interface to control display of a graphical representation thereon indicative of the computed crop processing metric ([0058]: “Operator interface controller 182 can control operator interface mechanisms 162 to generate graphical representations of the values”).
Regarding claim 18, Bonefas teaches a crop processing system for an agricultural harvesting machine (see system according Fig. 1 and depicted in Fig. 2), the crop processing system comprising:
a control system of claim 1 (see Fig. 2: controlling and processing systems 164 and 166 are included);
and first and second sensors operably coupled, in use, to the agricultural harvesting machine for obtaining first and second sensor data (see Fig. 2: imaging device 140 and radiation sensor 138).
Regarding claim 19, Bonefas teaches an agricultural harvesting machine comprising the control system of claim 1 (see harvester 100 of Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 20, Bonefas teaches a method of monitoring operation of an agricultural harvesting machine; the method comprising:
receiving first sensor data from a first sensor operably coupled, in use, to the harvesting machine, the first sensor data being indicative of a crop content measure ([0034]: ”receives sensor signals indicative of the reflected radiation from sensor 138 and processes those signals to obtain crop properties”);
receiving second sensor data from a second sensor operably coupled, in use, to the harvesting machine, the second sensor data being indicative of a crop size measure ([0035-0036]: image is captured and processed to determine crop “size distribution”);
computing a crop processing metric in dependence on the first and second sensor data ([0036-0038] and [0054]: crop metrics such as CSPS are determined and adjusted based on size distribution from the crop size measure and moisture from the crop content measure); and
controlling operation of one or more operable components of or otherwise associated with the agricultural harvesting machine in dependence on the processing metric ([0041]: metrics are evaluated to “generate control signals to adjust any operating subsystems on forage harvester”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK R BREWER whose telephone number is (571)272-4455. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-6PM.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 571-272-1206. 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.
/JACK R BREWER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ADAM D TISSOT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights