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 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.
Claim 6 is 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.
Claim 6 recites “the one or more controllers are configured to determine a crop conditioning metric..”. It is not clear whether the crop conditioning metric in claim 6 is the same crop conditioning metric recited in claim 1 (from which claim 6 depends) or a different crop conditioning metric. Clarification or correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-6 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 of the USPTO’s eligibility analysis entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claim 1-6 and 14-16 is directed to apparatus and claim 17 is directed to method.
As such, the claims are directed to statutory categories of invention.
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A. Step 2A of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong One, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception.
Claims 1 and 17 recite utilize the pre-conditioning sensor data and the post-conditioning sensor data to determine a crop conditioning metric and analyze one or more spectral properties. These limitations, as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinion or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recite mental processes.
Thus the claims recite an abstract idea.
If the claim recites a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea enumerated in Section I of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon), the claim requires further analysis in step 2A Prong Two. In step 2A Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
Claims 1 and 17 recite the additional limitations of receive pre-conditioning sensor data indicative of a first measurable property of crop material to be processed by the conditioning system; receive post-conditioning sensor data indicative of a second measurable property of crop material processed by the conditioning system, generate and output one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric .
Claim 1 also recites the additional limitation of one or more controllers
The additional limitations of “receive pre-conditioning sensor data..” and “receive post-conditioning sensor data..” are insignificant extra-solution activity. The limitation of “generate and output one or more control signals..” amounts to apply it as this is such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The limitation of the controller is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application in step 2A Prong Two, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
As stated above the additional limitations of “receive pre-conditioning sensor data..” and “receive post-conditioning sensor data..” are insignificant extra-solution activity. The Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. and buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere receiving or transmitting data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
As stated above, the additional limitation of “generate and output one or more control signals..” amounts to apply it as this is such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit).
As stated above, the limitation of the controller is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. o Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit).
Thus, even when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 2, the limitation of image data from a vision based sensor system merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea limitations. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 3, the limitations of first image data and second image data merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea limitations. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 4, the limitation of compare the first and second measurable properties under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinion and analyze one or more spectral properties , or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recite mental processes. Thus the claim recites an abstract idea. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 5, the limitation of the first and second measurable properties comprise different measurable properties, which are dependent or independent on one another merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea limitations. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 6, the limitations of to determine a crop conditioning metric which relates to one or both of a productivity for the harvesting operation performed by the agricultural machine, or a quality measure for the harvesting operation; to prioritize either a productivity for the operation or a quality measure for the operation under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinion and analyze one or more spectral properties , or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recite mental processes. Thus the claim recites an abstract idea. The limitation of control one or more controllable components in dependence thereon amounts to apply it. MPEP 2105 (F) (1) states Whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. The recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it". See Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1356, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1743-44 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1327, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1414, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In contrast, claiming a particular solution to a problem or a particular way to achieve a desired outcome may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Electric Power, 830 F.3d at 1356, 119 USPQ2d at 1743. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 14, the limitations of user interface is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). The limitation of display a graphical representation of the operation of the control system, including one or more of a graphical representation of the determined crop conditioning metric, the first and/or second measurable parameters is considered a mental process as they contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) (III)(A) In contrast, claims do recite a mental process when they contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. Examples of claims that recite mental processes include: a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016). For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 15, the limitation of controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system to control a level of conditioning applied by conditioning system in dependence on the crop conditioning metric amounts to apply it. MPEP 2105 (F) (1) states Whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. The recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it". See Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1356, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1743-44 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1327, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1414, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In contrast, claiming a particular solution to a problem or a particular way to achieve a desired outcome may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Electric Power, 830 F.3d at 1356, 119 USPQ2d at 1743. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Referring to claim 16, the limitation of agricultural machine merely confines the use of the abstract idea to a particular technical field of use and this fails to add an inventive concept to the claim. Affinity Labs of Texas v. DirecTV, LLC, 838 F.3d at 1259, 120 USPQ2d at 1204. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7,9,12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Murray 20210015032.
Referring to claim 1, Murray discloses a control system for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine, the control system comprising one or more controllers (54), and being configured to: receive pre-conditioning sensor data indicative of a first measurable property of crop material to be processed by the conditioning system (see paragraph 0035 receives data from sensor 50 degree of stem conditioning); receive post-conditioning sensor data indicative of a second measurable property of crop material processed by the conditioning system (See paragraph 0035 receives data from sensor 44); utilize the pre-conditioning sensor data and the post-conditioning sensor data to determine a crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0004, dry down time); and generate and output one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0015); wherein the pre-conditioning sensor data and/or the post-conditioning sensor data comprises spectral data (see paragraph 0029 and 0032, image sensor 44 and 50 can be near-infrared reflectance spectrometer or a red-green-blue color sensor) , and the one or more controllers are configured to analyze one or more spectral properties of the sensor data (see paragraph 0042).
Referring to claim 2, Murray discloses the pre-conditioning sensor data and/or the post-conditioning sensor data comprise image data from a vision-based sensor system (see paragraph 0029 and 0032).
Referring to claim 3, Murray discloses the vision-based sensor system comprises one or more image sensors (44, 50); and wherein the pre-conditioning sensor data comprises first image data from a first image sensor (50); and the post-conditioning sensor data comprises second image data from the first image sensor or a separate second image sensor (44).
Referring to claim 4, Murray discloses the one or more controllers (54) are configured to compare the first and second measurable properties (see paragraph 0045).
Referring to claim 5, Murray the first and second measurable properties comprise different measurable properties, which are dependent or independent on one another ( see paragraph 0042, can measure ash content or degree of stem conditioning) .
Referring to claim 6, Murray discloses wherein the one or more controllers are configured to determine a crop conditioning metric which relates to one or both of a productivity for the harvesting operation performed by the agricultural machine, or a quality measure for the harvesting operation ( amount as ash content would relate to quality measure); and wherein the one or more controllers are programmable to prioritize either a productivity for the operation or a quality measure for the operation and control the one or more controllable components in dependence thereon (see paragraph 0049,when ash content is outside a certain threshold then cutting height and speed are adjusted to reduce ash content so quality is prioritized).
Referring to claim 7, Murray discloses controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system comprises controlling an operational parameter of the component(s); wherein the operational parameter for the component(s) comprises an operational speed for the components; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control an operational speed of one or more conditioning rollers of the conditioning system in dependence on the conditioning metric ( see paragraph 0049 controller can control conditioning speed of conditioning system which include rolls 40).
Referring to claim 9, Murray discloses the one or more controllable components comprise a component positioning system, and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to utilize the component positioning system for controlling a position or displacement of one or more components of the conditioning system in dependence on the crop condition metric ( see paragraph 0049, controller can control fore/aft tilt angle of cutting system 24 relative to the ground).
Referring to claim 12, Murray discloses the one or more controllable components include a height or position control subsystem (cutting system 24) for a crop intake of the implement; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to utilize the height or position control subsystem for controlling a height or position of the crop intake in dependence on the first or second measurable properties and the conditioning metric determined therefrom (see paragraph 0049, the control can control the cut height of the cutting system relative to the ground) .
Referring to claim 13, Murray discloses the one or more controllable components include a cutting mechanism (24) of the implement; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control operation of the cutting mechanism through control of an operational speed of the cutting mechanism, or position of the cutting mechanism, including raising or lowering of cutting element(s) of the cutting mechanism in dependence on the first or second measurable properties and the conditioning metric determined therefrom (see paragraph 0049).
Referring to claim 14, Murray discloses the one or more controllable components comprise a user interface; and wherein the controller(s) are configured to control operation of the user interface to display a graphical representation of the operation of the control system, including one or more of a graphical representation of the determined crop conditioning metric, the first and/or second measurable parameters (see paragraph 0047, signal is sent to a communicator which includes a visual display).
Referring to claim 15, Murray discloses a conditioning system (20) for an agricultural machine, comprising: the control system (54) of claim 1, operable in use for controlling operation of one or more components ( 40)associated with the conditioning system to control a level of conditioning applied by conditioning system in dependence on the crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0049) .
Referring to claim 16, Murray discloses an agricultural machine (22) comprising the conditioning system (20) of claim 15.
Referring to claim 17, Murray discloses a computer implemented method for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine, the method comprising receiving pre-conditioning sensor data indicative of a first measurable property of crop material to be processed by the conditioning system (see paragraph 0035 receives data from sensor 50); receiving post-conditioning sensor data indicative of a second measurable property of crop material processed by the conditioning system (See paragraph 0035 receives data from sensor 44); utilizing the pre-conditioning sensor data and the post-conditioning sensor data to determine a crop conditioning metric (see abstract, determine ash content); and generating and outputting one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0048); wherein the pre-conditioning sensor data and/or the post-conditioning sensor data comprises spectral data (see paragraph 0029 and 0032, image sensor 44 and 50 can be near-infrared reflectance spectrometer or a red-green-blue color sensor) , and analyzing one or more spectral properties of the sensor data (see paragraph 0042).
Claim(s) 1,6,7,9-11,14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Wire et al. 20190116733.
Referring to claim 1, Wire ‘733 discloses a control system for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine, the control system (42) comprising one or more controllers (48), and being configured to: receive pre-conditioning sensor data indicative of a first measurable property of crop material to be processed by the conditioning system (see paragraph 0028 receives data from sensor 52); receive post-conditioning sensor data indicative of a second measurable property of crop material processed by the conditioning system (See paragraph 0028 receives data from sensor 50); utilize the pre-conditioning sensor data and the post-conditioning sensor data to determine a crop conditioning metric (see abstract, dry down time); and generate and output one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0028); wherein the pre-conditioning sensor data and/or the post-conditioning sensor data comprises spectral data (see paragraph 0029 sensors 50 and 52 can be near-infrared reflectance spectrometer or a red-green-blue color sensor) , and the one or more controllers are configured to analyze one or more spectral properties of the sensor data (see paragraph 0028).
Referring to claim 6, Wire‘733 discloses wherein the one or more controllers are configured to determine a crop conditioning metric which relates to one or both of a productivity for the harvesting operation performed by the agricultural machine, or a quality measure for the harvesting operation; and wherein the one or more controllers are programmable to prioritize either a productivity for the operation or a quality measure for the operation and control the one or more controllable components in dependence thereon (see paragraph 0033).
Referring to claim 7, Wire ‘733 discloses controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system comprises controlling an operational parameter of the component(s); wherein the operational parameter for the component(s) comprises an operational speed for the components; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control an operational speed of one or more conditioning rollers of the conditioning system in dependence on the conditioning metric ( see paragraph 0032 controller can control conditioning speed of conditioning system which include rolls 36).
Referring to claim 9, Wire‘733 discloses the one or more controllable components comprise a component positioning system, and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to utilize the component positioning system for controlling a position or displacement of one or more components of the conditioning system in dependence on the crop condition metric ( see paragraph 0032, controller can control gap between rollers).
Referring to claim 10, Wire‘733 discloses the component positioning system controls a conditioning roller displacement or “roll gap” associated with the conditioning system; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to set the roll gap in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0032).
Referring to claim 11, Wire‘733 discloses the operational parameter relates to a level of tensioning applied by the component positioning system for the conditioning component(s); and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to set the roller tensioning in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0032).
Referring to claim 14, Wire ‘733 discloses the one or more controllable components comprise a user interface; and wherein the controller(s) are configured to control operation of the user interface to display a graphical representation of the operation of the control system, including one or more of a graphical representation of the determined crop conditioning metric, the first and/or second measurable parameters (see paragraph 0028, signal is sent to a visual display).
Referring to claim 15, Wire ‘733 discloses a conditioning system (28) for an agricultural machine, comprising: the control system (42) of claim 1, operable in use for controlling operation of one or more components ( 36) associated with the conditioning system to control a level of conditioning applied by conditioning system in dependence on the crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0032) .
Referring to claim 16, Wire ‘733 discloses an agricultural machine (10) comprising the conditioning system (28) of claim 15.
Referring to claim 17, Wire ‘733 discloses a computer implemented method for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine, the method comprising receiving pre-conditioning sensor data indicative of a first measurable property of crop material to be processed by the conditioning system (see paragraph 0028 receives data from sensor 52); receiving post-conditioning sensor data indicative of a second measurable property of crop material processed by the conditioning system (See paragraph 0028 receives data from sensor 50); utilizing the pre-conditioning sensor data and the post-conditioning sensor data to determine a crop conditioning metric (see abstract, dry down time); and generating and outputting one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0028); wherein the pre-conditioning sensor data and/or the post-conditioning sensor data comprises spectral data (see paragraph 0029 sensors 50 and 52 can be near-infrared reflectance spectrometer or a red-green-blue color sensor) , and analyzing one or more spectral properties of the sensor data (see paragraph 0028).
Claim(s) 1,5,6,8,9,12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Wire et al. 20210059113 .
Referring to claim 1, Wire’113 discloses a control system for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine, the control system (42) comprising one or more controllers (48), and being configured to: receive pre-conditioning sensor data indicative of a first measurable property of crop material to be processed by the conditioning system (see paragraph 0027 receives data from sensor 50); receive post-conditioning sensor data indicative of a second measurable property of crop material processed by the conditioning system (See paragraph 0028 receives data from sensor 64, which can be located post conditioning, see element 64 after rollers 36); utilize the pre-conditioning sensor data and the post-conditioning sensor data to determine a crop conditioning metric (see abstract, optimize quality of cut crop material paragraph 0004); and generate and output one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0028); wherein the pre-conditioning sensor data and/or the post-conditioning sensor data comprises spectral data (see paragraph 0027-0028 sensors 50 and 64 can be near-infrared reflectance spectrometer or a red-green-blue color sensor) , and the one or more controllers are configured to analyze one or more spectral properties of the sensor data (see paragraph 0027).
Referring to claim 5, Wire the first and second measurable properties comprise different measurable properties, which are dependent or independent on one another (see paragraph 0027, sensor 50 can measure ash content, see paragraph 0028 sensor 64 can measure roughness of cut, excessive stubble height) .
Referring to claim 6, Wire’ 113 discloses wherein the one or more controllers are configured to determine a crop conditioning metric which relates to one or both of a productivity for the harvesting operation performed by the agricultural machine, or a quality measure for the harvesting operation; and wherein the one or more controllers are programmable to prioritize either a productivity for the operation or a quality measure for the operation and control the one or more controllable components in dependence thereon (see paragraph 0032).
Referring to claim 8, Wire ‘113 discloses the one or more controllable components comprise a drive control system for the agricultural machine; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to utilize the drive control system to control a forward speed of the agricultural machine in dependence on the determined metric (see paragraph 0031).
Referring to claim 9, Wire’ 113 discloses the one or more controllable components comprise a component positioning system, and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to utilize the component positioning system for controlling a position or displacement of one or more components of the conditioning system in dependence on the crop condition metric ( see paragraph 0031, controller can height or angle of lift mechanism).
Referring to claim 12, Wire’ 113 discloses the one or more controllable components include a height or position control subsystem (cutting system 24) for a crop intake of the implement; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to utilize the height or position control subsystem for controlling a height or position of the crop intake in dependence on the first or second measurable properties and the conditioning metric determined therefrom (see paragraph 0031) .
Referring to claim 13, Wire’ 113 discloses the one or more controllable components include a cutting mechanism (24) of the implement; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control operation of the cutting mechanism through control of an operational speed of the cutting mechanism, or position of the cutting mechanism, including raising or lowering of cutting element(s) of the cutting mechanism in dependence on the first or second measurable properties and the conditioning metric determined therefrom (see paragraph 0031).
Referring to claim 14, Wire ‘113 discloses the one or more controllable components comprise a user interface; and wherein the controller(s) are configured to control operation of the user interface to display a graphical representation of the operation of the control system, including one or more of a graphical representation of the determined crop conditioning metric, the first and/or second measurable parameters (see paragraph 0026, signal is sent to a visual display).
Referring to claim 15, Wire discloses a conditioning system (28) for an agricultural machine, comprising: the control system (42) of claim 1, operable in use for controlling operation of one or more components ( 36) associated with the conditioning system to control a level of conditioning applied by conditioning system in dependence on the crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0028) .
Referring to claim 16, Wire discloses an agricultural machine (10) comprising the conditioning system (28) of claim 15.
Referring to claim 17, Wire discloses a computer implemented method for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine, the method comprising receiving pre-conditioning sensor data indicative of a first measurable property of crop material to be processed by the conditioning system (see paragraph 0027 receives data from sensor 50); receiving post-conditioning sensor data indicative of a second measurable property of crop material processed by the conditioning system (See paragraph 0028 receives data from sensor 64, which can be located post conditioning, see element 64 after rollers 36); utilizing the pre-conditioning sensor data and the post-conditioning sensor data to determine a crop conditioning metric (see abstract, optimize quality of cut crop material paragraph 0004); and generating and outputting one or more control signals for controlling operation of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the determined crop conditioning metric (see paragraph 0028); wherein the pre-conditioning sensor data and/or the post-conditioning sensor data comprises spectral data (see paragraph 0027-0028 sensors 50 and 64 can be near-infrared reflectance spectrometer or a red-green-blue color sensor) , and analyzing one or more spectral properties of the sensor data (see paragraph 0027).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIOVANNA WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)272-7027. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am- 5 pm.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571) 272-5405. 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.
/Giovanna Wright/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights