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 .
Examiner’s Note
Applicant called the examiner on 07/20/2026 and argued that the final rejection mailed 07/16/2026 was improper due to swapping of the references Suleman et al. US 20230039718 A1 (“Suleman”) and Jensen et al. US 20180376128 A1 (“Jensen”), particularly in regards to claims 12 and 19. These arguments have been fully considered, and are persuasive. For this reason, the previous final rejection mailed 07/16/2026 has been withdrawn. However, the following non-final rejection addresses the claims with the proper prior art, and supersedes the previous office action.
Status of Claims
The Office Action is in response to the applicant’s communication on 07/20/2026. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 7-9, filed 06/12/2026, regarding the claim interpretation of claims 12-19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that a person of ordinary skill in the art would, after reading the specification, understand what was meant by claim language such as “a processing system”, “a control signal generator”, “a machine work point processing system”, etc. However, the entire point behind claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is that the claim language alone is not sufficient to clarify what is meant by the claims, and so the claims will be interpreted in light of the specification. In other words, the applicant’s arguments appear to be that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not need to interpret the claims in light of the specification because they can interpret the claims in light of the specification. This argument is unpersuasive, and so the claim interpretation is maintained. All of these elements are being interpreted as software on a computer. It should be noted that a claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is not a rejection or an objection, and is not an obstacle to making a set of claims allowable for a patent.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a processing system configured to receive a sensor signal” and “a control signal generator configured to generate a control signal” in claim 12, “a machine work point processing system configured to detect when a work point” in claim 13, “a perception sensor processing system configured to identify the passable non-crop area in the image” in claim 14, “a location processing system configured to access a map” in claim 15, “a boundary identification system configured to locate a boundary of the passable non-crop area” in claim 16, “a settings identification system configured to access a speed control value” in claim 17, “a settings identification system configured to access a header control” in claim 18, and “a processing system configured to receive a sensor signal” and “a control system configured to access a setting value” in claim 19.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumann et al. US 20200342225 A1 (“Schumann”) in combination with Jensen et al. US 20180376128 A1 (“Jensen”) and Wisdom et al. US 20210368686 A1 (“Wisdom”).
Regarding Claim 1. Schumann teaches a computer implemented method comprising:
detecting an area ahead of an agricultural vehicle in a direction of travel during a vehicle operation (FIGS. 2 and 3 show an agricultural vehicle (tractor) along with crop beds, containing both crops at 220 and undesirable vegetation (weeds) at 222. The tractor having an agrochemical application system at 104. In this example, the tractor has the AAS at the rear. However, the AAS may be implemented at the front and/or sides of the entity as well [paragraph 32]. Going with the implementation at the front of the entity for examination purposes, the AAS can comprise an application manager, a location determining system (LDS) at 108 of FIG. 1, an imaging system at 110, a database, and a geographic information system (GIS) module [paragraph 20]);
locating a boundary of a passable non-crop area in the detected area (The application manager is configured with a previously trained machine learning model to detect target vegetation, and receiving one or more images of a crop bed (and/or an area between crop beds) and/or turfgrass from the imaging system [paragraph 6]. Turfgrass and the areas between crop beds can both be interpreted as non-crop areas which the vehicle is shown passing over in FIG. 2); and
generating a control signal to control the agricultural vehicle in response to the agricultural vehicle traversing the boundary of the passable non-crop area (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation, wherein generating a control signal to control at least one of:
a header position actuator to position a header of the agricultural harvester at a target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area.
However, Jensen teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation (FIG. 1),
wherein generating a control signal to control at least one of:
a header position actuator to position a header of the agricultural harvester at a target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area (An agricultural working unit is shown at 2 of FIG. 1, and this unit is visibly a header. The agricultural working machine 1 and the agricultural working unit 2 are operated by an operator, i.e., the driver, wherein a driver assistance system 16 is provided as operator assistance, which can automatically control the speed and/or the steering angle of the agricultural working machine 1 and/or the working height of the agricultural working unit 2 [paragraph 23]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation as taught by Jensen so as to allow the agricultural tool of the vehicle to be raised to the proper height to be used for harvesting crops or spraying weeds, or simply to be lifted up higher when the vehicle is driving over turf and the header could get snagged if it is left at crop-level.
Schumann also does not teach:
generating a control signal to control at least one of:
a propulsion subsystem to propel the agricultural harvester at a target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area.
However, Wisdom teaches:
generating a control signal to control at least one of:
a propulsion subsystem to propel the agricultural harvester at a target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area (FIG. 19 illustrates an example process for adjusting a speed of a harvester based on a number of edible crowns of broccoli plants within a field [paragraph 27]. The harvester may represent a self-propelled automated platform [paragraph 35]. At 1916 of FIG. 19, the speed of the harvester is adjusted in view of the number of edible broccoli crowns (crops). The fastest the harvester may travel is a speed that allows enough time for the robotic arm(s) of the first row to harvest every edible crown within the first row [paragraph 316]. This means that the harvester 100 may travel at a speed that accommodates the robotic arms 126 in the first row to pick every harvestable edible crown, even if the other robotic arms 126 for the other rows remain relatively idle at times, as there may be relatively fewer harvestable edible crowns in the other rows. By way of another example, if there are relatively few edible crowns that are ready for harvesting across all rows, the speed of the harvester 100 may be increased to travel faster [paragraph 318]. This implies that if there are no harvestable crowns in a row (a non-crop passable area), the harvester can travel even faster. Note that a passable area in light of the specification of the present application is a non-crop area).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with generating a control signal to control at least one of: a propulsion subsystem to propel the agricultural harvester at a target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area as taught by Wisdom so as to allow the harvester to automatically adjust its speed as necessary and to precisely harvest crops and move faster when there are no crops to harvest.
Regarding Claim 2. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 1.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein detecting the area ahead of the agricultural vehicle comprises:
capturing an image of the detected area (FIG. 4 illustrates one example of a captured image utilized by system of FIG. 1 for detecting and managing target vegetation according to one embodiment of the present disclosure [paragraph 13]).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester.
However, Jensen teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester (FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester as taught by Jensen so as to apply the plant identifying techniques of Schumann to other types of agricultural applications, such as harvesting plants.
Regarding Claim 3. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 2.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein locating the boundary comprises:
performing image processing on the image of the detected area to identify the passable non-crop area and the boundary of the passable non-crop area (The ODS 120 of the application manager 106 processes and analyzes the captured images 124 and determines if the capture image(s) 124 comprises target vegetation (e.g., nutsedge, diseased vegetation, crabgrass, etc.). If the ODS 120 determines that the image 124 comprises target vegetation, the ODS 120 also determines the position of the target vegetation within the images(s) 124. The position of the target vegetation within the images(s) 124 may be determined by one or more trained layers within object detector 122 [paragraph 46]. In addition, the application manager further analyzes the data to determine the distance between the applicator/nozzle and the imaging device 126, the distance between the applicator/nozzle and the vegetation area (e.g., crop bed 208, turfgrass, etc.) [paragraph 48]).
Regarding Claim 6. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 1.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein generating the control signal comprises:
accessing a control settings value corresponding to the passable non-crop area; and
generating the control signal to control the agricultural harvester based on the control settings value corresponding to the passable non-crop area (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Regarding Claim 7. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 6.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein accessing the control settings value comprises:
identifying a type of the passable non-crop area; and
identifying the control settings value based on the type of the passable non-crop area (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Regarding Claim 8. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 6.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein accessing the control settings value comprises:
wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Schumann does not teach:
wherein accessing the control settings value comprises:
accessing a speed control value indicative of the target ground speed corresponding to the passable non-crop area, and
wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal to control the propulsion subsystem of the agricultural harvester to propel the agricultural harvester at the target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable area.
However, Wisdom teaches:
wherein accessing the control settings value comprises:
accessing a speed control value indicative of a target ground speed corresponding to the passable non-crop area, and
wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal to control a propulsion subsystem of the agricultural harvester to propel the agricultural harvester at the target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable area (FIG. 19 illustrates an example process for adjusting a speed of a harvester based on a number of edible crowns of broccoli plants within a field [paragraph 27]. The harvester may represent a self-propelled automated platform [paragraph 35]. At 1916 of FIG. 19, the speed of the harvester is adjusted in view of the number of edible broccoli crowns (crops). The fastest the harvester may travel is a speed that allows enough time for the robotic arm(s) of the first row to harvest every edible crown within the first row [paragraph 316]. This means that the harvester 100 may travel at a speed that accommodates the robotic arms 126 in the first row to pick every harvestable edible crown, even if the other robotic arms 126 for the other rows remain relatively idle at times, as there may be relatively fewer harvestable edible crowns in the other rows. By way of another example, if there are relatively few edible crowns that are ready for harvesting across all rows, the speed of the harvester 100 may be increased to travel faster [paragraph 318]. This implies that if there are no harvestable crowns in a row (a non-crop passable area), the harvester can travel even faster).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with wherein accessing the control settings value comprises: accessing a speed control value indicative of a target ground speed corresponding to the passable non-crop area, and wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal to control a propulsion subsystem of the agricultural harvester to propel the agricultural harvester at the target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable area as taught by Wisdom so as to allow the harvester to automatically adjust its speed as necessary to precisely harvest crops and move faster when there are no crops to harvest.
Regarding Claim 9. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 6.
Schumann does not teach:
wherein the agricultural harvester includes a header, wherein accessing the control settings value comprises:
accessing a header height control value indicative of the target header height corresponding to the passable non-crop area, and
wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal to control the header position actuator to position the header at the target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area.
However, Jensen teaches:
wherein the agricultural harvester includes a header (An agricultural working unit is shown at 2 of FIG. 1, and this unit is visibly a header), wherein accessing the control settings value comprises:
accessing a header height control value indicative of the target header height corresponding to the passable non-crop area (The agricultural working machine 1 and the agricultural working unit 2 are operated by an operator, i.e., the driver, wherein a driver assistance system 16 is provided as operator assistance, which can automatically control the speed and/or the steering angle of the agricultural working machine 1 and/or the working height of the agricultural working unit 2 [paragraph 23]), and
wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal to control the header position actuator to position the header at the target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area (The control of the agricultural working machine 1 and/or the agricultural working unit 2 by the driver assistance system 16 allows for a particularly precise working of a field crop comprising a multitude of useful plants. For example, with the aid of the agricultural working unit 2 represented here in the form of a mechanical hoe or a cultivator, the ground 4 between the useful plants can be worked in a particularly precise and comprehensive manner, for example being broken up, without damaging the useful plants 3. The area between the useful plants 3 is detected particularly precisely in this case, even when the area is covered by harmful plants (weeds) [paragraph 23]. The height of useful plants and weeds can be differentiated, in particular the plant height of the individual plants, can be detected, whereby it is possible to distinguish between (high growing) useful plants 3 and (low growing) harmful plants or weeds [paragraph 33]. The height of the particular useful plant or row of useful plants can be used to adjust the height of the mechanical hoe or cultivator [paragraph 9]. If the header can be adjusted to a specific height according to the height of weeds and crops, then when the harvester is traveling over a non-crop area, such as turf, the header can be adjusted accordingly).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with wherein the agricultural harvester includes a header, wherein accessing the control settings value comprises: accessing a header height control value indicative of the target header height corresponding to the passable non-crop area, and wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal to control the header position actuator to position the header at the target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area as taught by Jensen so as to allow the agricultural tool of the vehicle to be raised to the proper height to be used for harvesting crops or spraying weeds, or simply to be lifted up higher when the vehicle is driving over turf and the header could get snagged if it is left at crop-level.
Regarding Claim 10. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 1.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein locating the boundary comprises:
locating an entry boundary of the passable non-crop area (FIG. 4 illustrates one example of a captured image utilized by system of FIG. 1 for detecting and managing target vegetation according to one embodiment of the present disclosure, wherein the figure shows an area at C3 which contains no crops and contains only weeds, and clearly has an entry boundary and an exit boundary).
Regarding Claim 11. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 1.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein locating the boundary comprises:
locating an exit boundary of the passable non-crop area (FIG. 4 illustrates one example of a captured image utilized by system of FIG. 1 for detecting and managing target vegetation according to one embodiment of the present disclosure, wherein the figure shows an area at C3 which contains no crops and contains only weeds, and clearly has an entry boundary and an exit boundary).
Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumann et al. US 20200342225 A1 (“Schumann”) in combination with Jensen et al. US 20180376128 A1 (“Jensen”) and Wisdom et al. US 20210368686 A1 (“Wisdom”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Suleman et al. US 20230039718 A1 (“Suleman”).
Regarding Claim 4. Schumann in combination with Jensen and Wisdom teaches the computer implemented method of claim 1.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein detecting the area ahead of the agricultural vehicle comprises:
accessing a map of a field that includes the passable non-crop area (According to various embodiments, the application manager 106 and/or GIS module 146 can generate a map identifying the various locations at which the target vegetation was detected [paragraph 50]); and
detecting a location of the agricultural vehicle (The LDS 108, in one embodiment, comprises a Global Positioning System (GPS) module 130, which generates and records location data 132 and speed data 134 of the application system 104 [paragraph 25]. It is implied that the heading of the agricultural harvester is also detected, and if the area of the AAS but not expressly taught), and
wherein detecting the area ahead of the agricultural vehicle in the direction of travel during the vehicle operation includes detecting the area ahead of the agricultural vehicle based on the map and based on the location and the heading of the agricultural vehicle (the AAS may be implemented at the front and/or sides of the movable entity, even though the example shown in FIGS. 2 and 3 shows the AAS in the rear of the movable entity [paragraph 32]. FIG. 4 shows an example of the AAS detecting the area including vegetation [paragraph 35], which as stated in paragraph 32, can be an area in front of the vehicle).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, wherein detecting the area ahead of the agricultural harvester comprises detecting a heading of the agricultural harvester, and
wherein detecting the area ahead of the agricultural harvester includes detecting the heading of the agricultural harvester.
However, Suleman teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, wherein detecting the area ahead of the agricultural harvester comprises detecting a heading of the agricultural harvester, and
wherein detecting the area ahead of the agricultural harvester includes detecting the heading of the agricultural harvester (The control system may periodically receive data pertaining to the harvester heading, speed, and location, and utilize the data to generate a haul path for the haul vehicle to follow to align the mobile storage compartment with the conveyor outlet of the harvester [paragraph 15]).
Regarding Claim 5. Schumann in combination with Jensen, Wisdom, and Suleman teaches the computer implemented method of claim 4.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein locating a boundary comprises:
locating the boundary of the passable non-crop area based on the map and the location and the heading of the agricultural vehicle (The GIS module 146 can generate a mapped visualization of the data stored in the one or more databases 136. The generated maps can be a useful feature for turfgrass management and/or horticulture as they will be able to provide where targeted vegetation has occurred [paragraph 30]. Bounding boxes and identified object names 142 represent the bounding boxes and identified object names. For example, as discussed with respect to FIG. 4, images comprising the target vegetation can be annotated with text and/or the bounding box using specific software. The agrochemical amount 144 includes the amount of agrochemical applied to a targeted vegetation [paragraph 29], and in one embodiment, the image in FIG. 4 is divided into a grid section with boundaries shown around both the crop bed and around the various types of plants, with crops at 220 and weeds at 222. As shown in the figure, the weeds (non-crop area) can be divided up into their own bounded box-region when possible, with box C3 of FIR. 4 being an example. Combined with the GIS module comprising a mapping application that can generate maps for identifying areas where the target vegetation was detected as well as turfgrass [paragraph 30], and the map is used in addition to the location and heading of the agricultural vehicle as described in paragraph 32 to detect the boundary of the passable non-crop areas).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester.
However, Jensen teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester (FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester as taught by Jensen so as to apply the plant identifying techniques of Schumann to other types of agricultural applications, such as harvesting plants.
Claim(s) 12-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumann et al. US 20200342225 A1 (“Schumann”) in combination with Suleman et al. US 20230039718 A1 (“Suleman”).
Regarding Claim 12. Schumann teaches a control system comprising:
a processing system configured to receive a sensor signal and detect a passable non-crop area ahead of an agricultural vehicle in a direction of travel during a vehicle operation based on the sensor signal (FIGS. 2 and 3 show an agricultural vehicle (tractor) along with crop beds, containing both crops at 220 and undesirable vegetation (weeds) at 222. The tractor having an agrochemical application system at 104. In this example, the tractor has the AAS at the rear. However, the AAS may be implemented at the front and/or sides of the entity as well [paragraph 32]. Going with the implementation at the front of the entity for examination purposes, the AAS can comprise an application manager, a location determining system (LDS) at 108 of FIG. 1, an imaging system at 110, a database, and a geographic information system (GIS) module [paragraph 20]);
a non-crop area processor configured to generate an output signal indicative of a location of the passable non-crop area (The application manager is configured with a previously trained machine learning model to detect target vegetation, and receiving one or more images of a crop bed (and/or an area between crop beds) and/or turfgrass from the imaging system [paragraph 6]. Turfgrass and the areas between crop beds can both be interpreted as non-crop areas which the vehicle is shown passing over in FIG. 2); and
a control signal generator configured to generate a control signal to control the agricultural vehicle, based on the output signal, when the agricultural vehicle is traveling in the passable non-crop area (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation.
However, Suleman teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation (FIG. 1 shows the vehicle as a harvester, performing a harvesting operation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation as taught by Suleman so as to apply the plant identifying techniques of Schumann to other types of agricultural applications, such as harvesting plants.
Regarding Claim 13. Schumann in combination with Suleman teaches the control system of claim 12.
Schumann also teaches:
further comprising:
a machine work point processing system configured to detect when a work point on the agricultural vehicle is in the passable non-crop area based on the output signal (In some embodiments, the application manager 106 may also use the speed data 134 and the configuration data 112 to determine where to position the applicator(s) 114, how long to delay activation of the applicator(s) 114 if needed, and/or the like. In one embodiment, the configuration data 112 comprises information such as the position and distance of the applicator(s) 114 and the imaging device(s) 126 with respect to each other, the dispensing angle of the applicator(s) 114, coverage area of the applicator(s) 114, actuation speed of the applicator(s) 114, field-of-view of the imaging device(s) 126, distance of the applicator(s) 114 to the ground, location of the applicator(s) 114 on the application system 104, location of the imaging device(s) 126 on the application system 104, mapping of a given applicator 114 to a corresponding portion of the imaging device's field-of-view and/or captured images 124, and/or the like [paragraph 26]).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester.
However, Suleman teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester (FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester as taught by Suleman so as to apply the plant identifying techniques of Schumann to other types of agricultural applications, such as harvesting plants.
Regarding Claim 14. Schumann in combination with Suleman teaches the control system of claim 12.
Schumann also teaches:
further comprising a perception sensor configured to capture an image ahead of the agricultural harvester in the direction of travel (The ODS 120 comprises one or more object detectors 122 trained to identify target vegetation within images 124 captured by one or more imaging devices 126 of the imaging system 110 [paragraph 21], wherein the imaging system is a perception sensor configured to capture the image. FIGS. 2 and 3 show an agricultural vehicle (tractor) along with crop beds, containing both crops at 220 and undesirable vegetation (weeds) at 222. The tractor having an agrochemical application system at 104. In this example, the tractor has the AAS at the rear. However, the AAS may be implemented at the front and/or sides of the entity as well [paragraph 32]. Going with the implementation at the front of the entity for examination purposes, the AAS can comprise an application manager, a location determining system (LDS) at 108 of FIG. 1, an imaging system at 110, a database, and a geographic information system (GIS) module [paragraph 20]), and wherein the processing system comprises:
a perception sensor processing system configured to identify the passable non-crop area in the image (FIG. 4 illustrates one example of a captured image utilized by system of FIG. 1 for detecting and managing target vegetation according to one embodiment of the present disclosure [paragraph 13]. The ODS 120 comprises one or more object detectors 122 trained to identify target vegetation within images 124 captured by one or more imaging devices 126 of the imaging system 110 [paragraph 21], wherein the imaging system is a perception sensor configured to capture the image).
Regarding Claim 15. Schumann in combination with Suleman teaches the control system of claim 12.
Schumann also teaches:
further comprising a position sensor configured to detect a location of the agricultural vehicle (The LDS 108, in one embodiment, comprises a Global Positioning System (GPS) module 130, which generates and records location data 132 and speed data 134 of the application system 104 [paragraph 25]. It is implied that the heading of the agricultural harvester is also detected, and if the area of the AAS but not expressly taught), and
wherein the processing system comprises:
a location processing system configured to access a map of a field that includes the passable non-crop area and detect the passable non-crop area ahead of the agricultural harvester based on the map and based on the location of the agricultural vehicle (According to various embodiments, the application manager 106 and/or GIS module 146 can generate a map identifying the various locations at which the target vegetation was detected [paragraph 50]. The AAS may be implemented at the front and/or sides of the movable entity, even though the example shown in FIGS. 2 and 3 shows the AAS in the rear of the movable entity [paragraph 32]. FIG. 4 shows an example of the AAS detecting the area including vegetation [paragraph 35], which as stated in paragraph 32, can be an area in front of the vehicle).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester.
However, Suleman teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester (FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester as taught by Suleman so as to apply the plant identifying techniques of Schumann to other types of agricultural applications, such as harvesting plants.
Regarding Claim 16. Schumann in combination with Suleman teaches the control system of claim 12.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein the non-crop area processor comprises:
a boundary identification system configured to locate a boundary of the passable non-crop area and generate a boundary identifier indicative of the location of the boundary (The application manager is configured with a previously trained machine learning model to detect target vegetation, and receiving one or more images of a crop bed (and/or an area between crop beds) and/or turfgrass from the imaging system [paragraph 6]. Turfgrass and the areas between crop beds can both be interpreted as non-crop areas which the vehicle is shown passing over in FIG. 2), the control signal generator configured to generate the control signal based on the boundary identifier (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Regarding Claim 19. Schumann teaches an agricultural system comprising:
a processing system configured to receive a sensor signal and detect a passable non-crop area ahead of an agricultural vehicle in a direction of travel during a vehicle operation based on the sensor signal (FIGS. 2 and 3 show an agricultural vehicle (tractor) along with crop beds, containing both crops at 220 and undesirable vegetation (weeds) at 222. The tractor having an agrochemical application system at 104. In this example, the tractor has the AAS at the rear. However, the AAS may be implemented at the front and/or sides of the entity as well [paragraph 32]. Going with the implementation at the front of the entity for examination purposes, the AAS can comprise an application manager, a location determining system (LDS) at 108 of FIG. 1, an imaging system at 110, a database, and a geographic information system (GIS) module [paragraph 20]); and
a control system configured to access a setting value corresponding to the passable non-crop area and generate a control signal to control the agricultural vehicle with the setting value when the agricultural vehicle is traveling in the passable non-crop area (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation.
However, Suleman teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation (FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester, and the vehicle operation is a harvesting operation as taught by Suleman so as to apply the plant identifying techniques of Schumann to other types of agricultural applications, such as harvesting plants.
Regarding Claim 20. Schumann in combination with Suleman teaches the agricultural system of claim 19.
Schumann also teaches:
further comprising:
a perception sensor configured to capture an image of an area ahead of the agricultural vehicle in the direction of travel and generate the sensor signal based on the captured image (FIG. 4 illustrates one example of a captured image utilized by system of FIG. 1 for detecting and managing target vegetation according to one embodiment of the present disclosure [paragraph 13]. In one embodiment, the application manager 106 comprises an object detection system (ODS) 120. The ODS 120 comprises one or more object detectors 122 trained to identify target vegetation within images 124 captured by one or more imaging devices 126 of the imaging system 110 [paragraph 21], wherein the imaging system is a sensor configured to capture the image).
Schumann does not teach:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester.
However, Suleman teaches:
the agricultural vehicle is a harvester (FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with the agricultural vehicle is a harvester as taught by Suleman so as to apply the plant identifying techniques of Schumann to other types of agricultural applications, such as harvesting plants.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumann et al. US 20200342225 A1 (“Schumann”) in combination with Suleman et al. US 20230039718 A1 (“Suleman”) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Wisdom et al. US 20210368686 A1 (“Wisdom”).
Regarding Claim 17. Schumann in combination with Suleman teaches the control system of claim 12.
Schumann also teaches:
wherein the control signal generator comprises:
wherein generating the control signal comprises generating the control signal while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area (The one or more or more applicators 114 are controlled by the application manager 106 to selectively apply an agrochemical (e.g., herbicide, fungicide, etc.) to target vegetation 222 (e.g., a weed, diseased vegetation, etc.) without intentionally applying the agrochemical to the desirable vegetation (e.g., the crop 220, turf) [paragraph 34]. FIGS. 5 and 6 show how the control of the application flow is issued based on the target vegetation detected. Note that if turf is not intended to be sprayed, as stated in paragraph 34, this means that when the vehicle enters a turf area, the controller will shut off the application flow).
Schumann does not teach:
a settings identification system configured to access a speed control value indicative of a target ground speed corresponding to the passable non-crop area; and
a speed control processor configured to generate the control signal to control a propulsion subsystem of the agricultural harvester to propel the agricultural harvester at the target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable area.
However, Wisdom teaches:
a settings identification system configured to access a speed control value indicative of a target ground speed corresponding to the passable non-crop area; and
a speed control processor configured to generate the control signal to control a propulsion subsystem of the agricultural harvester to propel the agricultural harvester at the target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable area (FIG. 19 illustrates an example process for adjusting a speed of a harvester based on a number of edible crowns of broccoli plants within a field [paragraph 27]. The harvester may represent a self-propelled automated platform [paragraph 35]. At 1916 of FIG. 19, the speed of the harvester is adjusted in view of the number of edible broccoli crowns (crops). The fastest the harvester may travel is a speed that allows enough time for the robotic arm(s) of the first row to harvest every edible crown within the first row [paragraph 316]. This means that the harvester 100 may travel at a speed that accommodates the robotic arms 126 in the first row to pick every harvestable edible crown, even if the other robotic arms 126 for the other rows remain relatively idle at times, as there may be relatively fewer harvestable edible crowns in the other rows. By way of another example, if there are relatively few edible crowns that are ready for harvesting across all rows, the speed of the harvester 100 may be increased to travel faster [paragraph 318]. This implies that if there are no harvestable crowns in a row (a non-crop passable area), the harvester can travel even faster).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with a settings identification system configured to access a speed control value indicative of a target ground speed corresponding to the passable non-crop area; and a speed control processor configured to generate the control signal to control a propulsion subsystem of the agricultural harvester to propel the agricultural harvester at the target ground speed while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable area as taught by Wisdom so as to allow the harvester to automatically adjust its speed as necessary to precisely harvest crops and move faster when there are no crops to harvest.
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumann et al. US 20200342225 A1 (“Schumann”) in combination with Suleman et al. US 20230039718 A1 (“Suleman”) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Jensen et al. US 20180376128 A1 (“Jensen”).
Regarding Claim 18. Schumann in combination with Suleman teaches the control system of claim 12.
Schumann does not teach:
wherein the control signal generator comprises:
a settings identification system configured to access a header control value indicative of a target header height corresponding to the passable non-crop area; and
a control processor configured to generate the control signal to control a header position actuator on the agricultural harvester to move the header to the target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area.
However, Jensen teaches:
wherein the control signal generator comprises:
a settings identification system configured to access a header control value indicative of a target header height corresponding to the passable non-crop area (An agricultural working unit is shown at 2 of FIG. 1, and this unit is visibly a header. The agricultural working machine 1 and the agricultural working unit 2 are operated by an operator, i.e., the driver, wherein a driver assistance system 16 is provided as operator assistance, which can automatically control the speed and/or the steering angle of the agricultural working machine 1 and/or the working height of the agricultural working unit 2 [paragraph 23]); and
a control processor configured to generate the control signal to control a header position actuator on the agricultural harvester to move the header to the target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area (The control of the agricultural working machine 1 and/or the agricultural working unit 2 by the driver assistance system 16 allows for a particularly precise working of a field crop comprising a multitude of useful plants. For example, with the aid of the agricultural working unit 2 represented here in the form of a mechanical hoe or a cultivator, the ground 4 between the useful plants can be worked in a particularly precise and comprehensive manner, for example being broken up, without damaging the useful plants 3. The area between the useful plants 3 is detected particularly precisely in this case, even when the area is covered by harmful plants (weeds) [paragraph 23]. The height of useful plants and weeds can be differentiated, in particular the plant height of the individual plants, can be detected, whereby it is possible to distinguish between (high growing) useful plants 3 and (low growing) harmful plants or weeds [paragraph 33]. The height of the particular useful plant or row of useful plants can be used to adjust the height of the mechanical hoe or cultivator [paragraph 9]. If the header can be adjusted to a specific height according to the height of weeds and crops, then when the harvester is traveling over a non-crop area, such as turf, the header can be adjusted accordingly).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Schumann with wherein the control signal generator comprises: a settings identification system configured to access a header control value indicative of a target header height corresponding to the passable non-crop area; and a control processor configured to generate the control signal to control a header position actuator on the agricultural harvester to move the header to the target header height while the agricultural harvester is traversing the passable non-crop area as taught by Jensen so as to allow the agricultural tool of the vehicle to be raised to the proper height to be used for harvesting crops or spraying weeds, or simply to be lifted up higher when the vehicle is driving over turf and the header could get snagged if it is left at crop-level.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON G CAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7009. The examiner can normally be reached Monday: 7:30am - 4:30pm EST to Friday 7:30pm - 4:30am.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/AARON G CAIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights