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 .
Status of the Claims
The claims 1-4 and 6-16 are currently pending and have been examined. Applicant has amended claims 1, 2, 6, 11, 12, 14 and 15 and cancelled claim 5.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
The amendment filed April 2, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4 and 6-16 are currently pending in the Application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the specification objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed January 9th, 2026.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 and 6-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-4 and 6-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engel (EP 3981244 A1) in view of Wu (US 10255670 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Engel teaches A method of controlling an agricultural harvester, the method comprising: receiving past sensor signals from a field sensor of a first agricultural vehicle, the past sensor signals representing a field or crop property at specified locations in an agricultural field (See at least paragraph [0004], “One or more information maps are obtained by an agricultural work machine. The one or more information maps map one or more agricultural characteristic values at different geographic locations of a field.”), based on the past sensor signals and the real-time sensor signals, determining a field prediction representing the field or crop property at a future location in the agricultural field (See at least paragraph [0004], “A predictive map generator generates a predictive map that predicts a predictive agricultural characteristic at different locations in the field based on a relationship between the values in the one or more information maps and the agricultural characteristic sensed by the in-situ sensor.”), and based on the field prediction, controlling an operational parameter of the agricultural harvester (See at least paragraph [0004], “The predictive map can be output and used in automated machine control.”).
Engel does not explicitly disclose, however, Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches while harvesting, receiving real-time sensor signals from the field sensor after the field sensor is removed from the first agricultural vehicle and installed on the agricultural harvester, the real-time sensor signals representing the field or crop property at a current location in the agricultural field (See at least Col. 4 lines 25-45, “During herbicide spraying the portable framework is mounted to the spray machine. But during seeding, the devices in the portable framework are moved and attached to the planter vehicle to exercise another procedure such as residue detection or depth control for seed placement…Further, by using the same devices, the measurements are easier to correlate from plant to plant and field location to location as the plant grows, matures and is harvested. For example, electronic offsets or properties unique to a device are better calibrated out (e.g. pixel defects, light exposure, color) as the devices follow and track the same crop rows or plants throughout the crop cycle from the initial crop field/soil preparation, tillage, spraying, seeding, watering, growing, checking for insects, etc., all the way through harvesting of the crops, then residue management”, col. 4 lines 50-55, “An image sensor system includes multiple units 50. The image sensor units 50 are mounted to a portable platform 52 (e.g. rod 52, or attachment fixture 1952) that can be moved, relocated and transferred from among different crop management vehicles”, and col. 13 lines 45-50, “In some embodiments, the mounting fixtures 52 remain fixed in place and the sensor units 50 are moved from vehicle to vehicle ( e.g. sprayer to harvester).” The system utilizes portable sensor units that are transferred among agricultural vehicles, including movement from a sprayer to a harvester, thereby removing a sensor from a first agricultural vehicle and installing on an agricultural harvester.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Engel with the teachings of Wu such that the agricultural harvester of Engel is further configured to, while harvesting, receiving real-time sensor signals from the field sensor after the field sensor is removed from the first agricultural vehicle and installed on the agricultural harvester, the real-time sensor signals representing the field or crop property at a current location in the agricultural field, as taught by Wu (See paragraph Col. 4 lines 25-45, col. 4 lines 50-55, and col. 13 lines 45-50.), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to improve crop yield, preserve the land, save water, and reduce the use of harmful chemicals in each crop field area, as taught by Wu (See Col. 1 lines 50-60.).
Regarding Claim 2, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the field sensor of the first agricultural vehicle is a radar sensor (See at least paragraph [0073], “In-situ sensors 208 illustratively include a biomass sensor, such as biomass sensor 336, as well as a processing system 338. In some instances, biomass sensor 336 may be located on-board of the agricultural harvester 100. The processing system 338 processes sensor data generated from on-board biomass sensor 336 to generate processed data, some examples of which are described below” and paragraph [0074], “In some examples, biomass sensor 336 may be an optical sensor, such as a camera, a stereo camera, a mono camera, lidar, or radar, that generates images of an area of a field to be harvested.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 2, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the field prediction representing the field or crop property at a future location in the agricultural field is based on the past and real-time radar signals, and on an additional sensor signal from an additional sensor of the first agricultural vehicle and/or the agricultural harvester (See at least paragraph [0074] and paragraph [0075], “In-situ sensor 208 may be or include other types of sensors, such as a camera located along a path by which severed vegetation material travels in agricultural harvester 100 (referred to hereinafter as "process camera")…In other examples, in-situ sensor 208 may include a material distribution sensor that measures the volume or mass of material at two or more locations. The measurements may be absolute or relative. In some examples, electromagnetic or ultrasonic sensors may be used to measure time of flight, phase shift, or binocular disparities of one or more signals reflected by material surfaces at distances relative to a reference surface.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 3, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the additional sensor is a camera (See at least paragraph [0075], “In-situ sensor 208 may be or include other types of sensors, such as a camera located along a path by which severed vegetation material travels in agricultural harvester 100 (referred to hereinafter as "process camera").”).
Regarding Claim 6, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the field or crop property comprises a ground profile, a crop height, a grain height, a weed density, or a crop density (See at least paragraph [0029], “Prior to describing how agricultural harvester 100 generates a functional predictive biomass map and uses the functional predictive biomass map for control, a brief description of some of the items on agricultural harvester 100 and their respective operations will first be described. The description of FIG. 2 and 3 describe receiving a general type of prior information map and combining information from the prior information map with a georeferenced sensor signal generated by an in-situ sensor, where the sensor signal is indicative of a characteristic in the field, such as characteristics of crop present in the field. Characteristics of the field may include, but are not limited to, characteristics of a field such as slope, weed intensity, weed type, soil moisture, surface quality; characteristics of vegetation properties, such as vegetation height, vegetation volume, vegetation moisture, vegetation mass, and vegetation density; characteristics of crop properties, such as crop height, crop volume, crop moisture, crop mass, crop density, and crop state; characteristics of grain properties such as grain moisture, grain size, grain test weight; and characteristics of machine performance such as loss levels, job quality, fuel consumption, and power utilization.”).
With respect to claim 14, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 6, which is commensurate in scope to claim 14, with claim 6 being drawn to a method of controlling an agricultural harvester and claim 14 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 7, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the operational parameter comprises a driving speed, a header setting, a threshing setting, or a cleaning setting of the agricultural harvester (See at least paragraph [0028], “In one example, various machine settings can be set or controlled to achieve a desired performance. The machine settings can include such things as concave clearance, rotor speed, sieve and chaffer settings, and cleaning fan speed. Other machine settings can also be controlled…The machine speed, as well as various other machine settings, such as header height, can be controlled based on the estimated biomass to maintain the desired throughput.”).
With respect to claim 15, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 7, which is commensurate in scope to claim 15, with claim 7 being drawn to a method of controlling an agricultural harvester and claim 15 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 8, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the first agricultural vehicle is a sprayer or a weeder (See at least paragraph [0045], “In another example, the prior information map 258 may be a weed intensity map generated during a prior operation, such as from a sprayer, and the variable sensed by the in-situ sensors 208 may be weed intensity.”).
Regarding Claim 9, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the first agricultural vehicle is an autonomous agricultural vehicle (See at least paragraph [0053], “As explained above, the in-situ sensors 208 include on-board sensors 222; remote in-situ sensors 224, such as UAV-based sensors flown at a time to gather in-situ data, shown in block 290; or other types of in-situ sensors, designated by in-situ sensors 226. In some examples, data from on-board sensors is georeferenced using position, heading, or speed data from geographic position sensor 204.”).
Regarding Claim 10, Engel and Wu teach The method of controlling an agricultural harvester of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the agricultural harvester is a combine harvester (See at least paragraph [0015], “FIG. 1 is a partial pictorial, partial schematic, illustration of a self-propelled agricultural harvester 100. In the illustrated example, agricultural harvester 100 is a combine harvester.”).
With respect to claim 16, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 10, which is commensurate in scope to claim 16, with claim 10 being drawn to a method of controlling an agricultural harvester and claim 16 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 11, Engel teaches A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing instructions thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to execute the method of claim 1 (See at least paragraph [0199], “Memory 21 stores operating system 29, network settings 31, applications 33, application configuration settings 35, data store 37, communication drivers 39, and communication configuration settings 41. Memory 21 can include all types of tangible volatile and non-volatile computer-readable memory devices. Memory 21 may also include computer storage media (described below). Memory 21 stores computer readable instructions that, when executed by processor 17, cause the processor to perform computer-implemented steps or functions according to the instructions. Processor 17 may be activated by other components to facilitate their functionality as well.”): Regarding Claim 1, Engel teaches A method of controlling an agricultural harvester, the method comprising: receiving past sensor signals from a field sensor of a first agricultural vehicle, the past sensor signals representing a field or crop property at specified locations in an agricultural field (See at least paragraph [0004], “One or more information maps are obtained by an agricultural work machine. The one or more information maps map one or more agricultural characteristic values at different geographic locations of a field.”), based on the past sensor signals and the real-time sensor signals, determining a field prediction representing the field or crop property at a future location in the agricultural field (See at least paragraph [0004], “A predictive map generator generates a predictive map that predicts a predictive agricultural characteristic at different locations in the field based on a relationship between the values in the one or more information maps and the agricultural characteristic sensed by the in-situ sensor.”), and based on the field prediction, controlling an operational parameter of the agricultural harvester (See at least paragraph [0004], “The predictive map can be output and used in automated machine control.”).
Engel does not explicitly disclose, however, Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches while harvesting, receiving real-time sensor signals from the field sensor after the field sensor is removed from the first agricultural vehicle and installed on the agricultural harvester, the real-time sensor signals representing the field or crop property at a current location in the agricultural field (See at least Col. 4 lines 25-45, “During herbicide spraying the portable framework is mounted to the spray machine. But during seeding, the devices in the portable framework are moved and attached to the planter vehicle to exercise another procedure such as residue detection or depth control for seed placement…Further, by using the same devices, the measurements are easier to correlate from plant to plant and field location to location as the plant grows, matures and is harvested. For example, electronic offsets or properties unique to a device are better calibrated out (e.g. pixel defects, light exposure, color) as the devices follow and track the same crop rows or plants throughout the crop cycle from the initial crop field/soil preparation, tillage, spraying, seeding, watering, growing, checking for insects, etc., all the way through harvesting of the crops, then residue management”, col. 4 lines 50-55, “An image sensor system includes multiple units 50. The image sensor units 50 are mounted to a portable platform 52 (e.g. rod 52, or attachment fixture 1952) that can be moved, relocated and transferred from among different crop management vehicles”, and col. 13 lines 45-50, “In some embodiments, the mounting fixtures 52 remain fixed in place and the sensor units 50 are moved from vehicle to vehicle ( e.g. sprayer to harvester).” The system teaches portable sensor units that are transferred among agricultural vehicles, including movement from a sprayer to a harvester, thereby removing a sensor from a first agricultural vehicle and installing on an agricultural harvester.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Engel with the teachings of Wu such that the agricultural harvester of Engel is further configured to, while harvesting, receiving real-time sensor signals from the field sensor after the field sensor is removed from the first agricultural vehicle and installed on the agricultural harvester, the real-time sensor signals representing the field or crop property at a current location in the agricultural field, as taught by Wu (See paragraph Col. 4 lines 25-45, col. 4 lines 50-55, and col. 13 lines 45-50.), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to improve crop yield, preserve the land, save water, and reduce the use of harmful chemicals in each crop field area, as taught by Wu (See Col. 1 lines 50-60.).
Regarding Claim 12, Engel teaches An agricultural harvester comprising a field sensor for generating real-time sensor signals representing a field or crop property at a current location in an agricultural field and a controller operatively coupled to the field sensor, wherein the controller: receives past sensor signals from the field sensor (See at least paragraph [0004], “One or more information maps are obtained by an agricultural work machine. The one or more information maps map one or more agricultural characteristic values at different geographic locations of a field. An in-situ sensor on the agricultural work machine senses an agricultural characteristic as the agricultural work machine moves through the field. A predictive map generator generates a predictive map that predicts a predictive agricultural characteristic at different locations in the field based on a relationship between the values in the one or more information maps and the agricultural characteristic sensed by the in-situ sensor. The predictive map can be output and used in automated machine control.”), based on the past sensor signals and the real-time sensor signals, determines a field prediction representing the field or crop property at a future location in the agricultural field (See at least paragraph [0004], “A predictive map generator generates a predictive map that predicts a predictive agricultural characteristic at different locations in the field based on a relationship between the values in the one or more information maps and the agricultural characteristic sensed by the in-situ sensor.”), and based on the field prediction, controls an operational parameter of the agricultural harvester (See at least paragraph [0004], “The predictive map can be output and used in automated machine control.”).
Engel does not explicitly disclose, however, Wu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the past sensor signals captured when the field sensor is installed on a first agricultural vehicle, the past sensor signals representing the field or crop property at specified locations in the agricultural field (See at least Col. 4 lines 25-45, “During herbicide spraying the portable framework is mounted to the spray machine. But during seeding, the devices in the portable framework are moved and attached to the planter vehicle to exercise another procedure such as residue detection or depth control for seed placement…Further, by using the same devices, the measurements are easier to correlate from plant to plant and field location to location as the plant grows, matures and is harvested. For example, electronic offsets or properties unique to a device are better calibrated out (e.g. pixel defects, light exposure, color) as the devices follow and track the same crop rows or plants throughout the crop cycle from the initial crop field/soil preparation, tillage, spraying, seeding, watering, growing, checking for insects, etc., all the way through harvesting of the crops, then residue management”, col. 4 lines 50-55, “An image sensor system includes multiple units 50. The image sensor units 50 are mounted to a portable platform 52 (e.g. rod 52, or attachment fixture 1952) that can be moved, relocated and transferred from among different crop management vehicles”, and col. 13 lines 45-50, “In some embodiments, the mounting fixtures 52 remain fixed in place and the sensor units 50 are moved from vehicle to vehicle ( e.g. sprayer to harvester).” The system utilizes the same sensor devices being mounted on agricultural vehicles, tracking the same crop rows and field locations throughout the crop cycle, and generating measurements that are correlated from plant-to-plant and field location-to-field location, thereby capturing past sensor signals when the field sensor is installed on a first agricultural vehicle and representing field or crop properties at specified field locations.), while harvesting, receives the real-time sensor signals generated by the field sensor after the field sensor is removed from the first agricultural vehicle and installed on the agricultural harvester (See at least Col. 4 lines 25-45, “During herbicide spraying the portable framework is mounted to the spray machine. But during seeding, the devices in the portable framework are moved and attached to the planter vehicle to exercise another procedure such as residue detection or depth control for seed placement…Further, by using the same devices, the measurements are easier to correlate from plant to plant and field location to location as the plant grows, matures and is harvested. For example, electronic offsets or properties unique to a device are better calibrated out (e.g. pixel defects, light exposure, color) as the devices follow and track the same crop rows or plants throughout the crop cycle from the initial crop field/soil preparation, tillage, spraying, seeding, watering, growing, checking for insects, etc., all the way through harvesting of the crops, then residue management”, col. 4 lines 50-55, “An image sensor system includes multiple units 50. The image sensor units 50 are mounted to a portable platform 52 (e.g. rod 52, or attachment fixture 1952) that can be moved, relocated and transferred from among different crop management vehicles”, and col. 13 lines 45-50, “In some embodiments, the mounting fixtures 52 remain fixed in place and the sensor units 50 are moved from vehicle to vehicle ( e.g. sprayer to harvester).” The system utilizes portable sensor units that are transferred among agricultural vehicles, including movement from a sprayer to a harvester, thereby removing a sensor from a first agricultural vehicle and installing on an agricultural harvester.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Engel with the teachings of Wu such that the agricultural harvester of Engel is further configured to utilize the past sensor signals captured when the field sensor is installed on a first agricultural vehicle, the past sensor signals representing the field or crop property at specified locations in the agricultural field and while harvesting, receiving the real-time sensor signals generated by the field sensor after the field sensor is removed from the first agricultural vehicle and installed on the agricultural harvester, as taught by Wu (See paragraph Col. 4 lines 25-45, col. 4 lines 50-55, and col. 13 lines 45-50.), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to improve crop yield, preserve the land, save water, and reduce the use of harmful chemicals in each crop field area, as taught by Wu (See Col. 1 lines 50-60.).
Regarding Claim 13, Engel and Wu teach The agricultural harvester of claim 12, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Engel teaches wherein the field sensor of the agricultural harvester is a radar sensor (See at least paragraph [0074], “In some examples, biomass sensor 336 may be an optical sensor, such as a camera, a stereo camera, a mono camera, lidar, or radar, that generates images of an area of a field to be harvested.”).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEWEL ASHLEY KUNTZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5542. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5:30pm.
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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. 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.
/JEWEL A KUNTZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights