Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In each of claims 1 and 12, the words “agricultural implement of the type configured for use with a vehicle comprising a vehicle control unit and configured to receive a power signal from the vehicle …” should be rewritten as “agricultural implement of the type configured for use with a vehicle comprising a vehicle control unit, wherein the agricultural implement is configured to receive a power signal from the vehicle …”.
The foregoing changes are required to correct antecedent basis, clerical and/or grammatical errors. Examiner will examine the merits of the claims based on the foregoing changes.
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 vehicle control unit, an implement control unit, a protocol translation unit, as in claims 1 and 12.
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 § 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.
Claim 4 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 4 recites “The agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the protocol translation unit comprises a first processing device separate from a second processing device constituting at least a portion of the implement control unit.” It is unclear what is constituting at least a portion of the implement control unit. Is it the protocol translation unit or the first processing device or the second processing device?
For the sake of examination, the Examiner will strikeout the words “constituting at least a portion of the implement control unit”.
Appropriate amendments are required to address the above-identified issues. No new matter should be added for any amendment.
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 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-9 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as being unpatentable over Allgaier et al. (US 2021/0325868) in view of Curtis et al. (US 2020/0153174.)
Regarding claim 1, Allgaier teaches an agricultural implement of the type configured for use with a vehicle comprising a vehicle control unit wherein the agricultural implement is configured to receive a power signal from the vehicle, the implement comprising: an implement control unit configured to be operatively connected to the vehicle control unit and to exchange data conforming to a first communication protocol with the vehicle control unit; (see Allgaier at the Abstract which discloses that described herein are expandable network architectures with communication systems having multiple networks for communications between machines and implements for field operations including planting and harvesting operations and that a communication system includes a first communication module including at least one port of a first network, at least one input port and at least one output port of a second network, and a first network gateway to translate between a first protocol for the first network and a second protocol for the second network; see Allgaier at [0004] which further discloses that described herein are expandable network architectures with communication systems having multiple networks for communications between machines and implements for field operations including planting operations; see Allgaier, at [0006] and at Fig. 1, which discloses and illustratively depicts a machine 102(e.g., tractor, combine harvester, etc.) and an implement 140 e.g., planter, cultivator, plough, sprayer, spreader, irrigation implement, etc.) in accordance with one embodiment; see Allgaier at [0014] which discloses that the network gateway translates or converts between a first protocol for the first network and a second protocol for a second network having a switched power line coupled with a communications channel. Examiner maps machine such as a tractor or combine harvester to the vehicle. Examiner maps implement 140, such as a planter or irrigation implement, for example, to the recited implement. Further, see Allgaier at Fig. 1 which depicts controllers 154 as well as processing system 162 of the implement 140 and processing system 120 and controllers 111 of the machine 102. Examiner maps controllers 154 and/or processing system 162 to implement control unit. Examiner maps processing system 120 and/or controllers 111 to vehicle control unit. With respect to the interpretation of the claims under 35 USC 112(f), the published specification at [0007] states that as known in the art, the vehicle 102 typically comprises a vehicle control unit 110, which may comprise one or more suitable processing devices (e.g., a processor and corresponding memory having processor-executable instructions stored thereon and/or equivalents thereof). Examiner further notes that Allgaier at [0018] further discloses that the processing system 120 may include one or more microprocessors, processors, a system on a chip, or one or more microcontrollers. The published specification at [0008] states that the agricultural implement 104 comprises an implement control unit 120 that may also be implemented in a similar manner to the vehicle control unit 110, i.e., a processor and corresponding memory storing processor executable instructions and/or equivalents thereof. Examiner further notes that Allgaier at [0024-0025] further discloses that the controllers may include processors in communication with a plurality of seed sensors.)
at least one actuator system; (see Allgaier at [0024] which discloses sensors 152 (e.g., speed sensors, seed sensors for detecting passage of seed, downforce sensors, actuator valves, OEM sensors, flow sensors, etc.), controllers 154 (e.g., drive system for seed meter, GPS receiver), and the processing system 162 control and monitoring operations of the implement; see Allgaier at [0025] which discloses sensors and controllers may sense changes in an electric motor that controls each row of a planter individually. Examiner maps actuator valves, controllers, and electric motors to at least one actuator system.)
and a protocol translation unit: operatively connected to the implement control unit, the protocol translation unit configured to receive the power signal from the vehicle and to receive, from the implement control unit, information at least based upon the data conforming to the first communication protocol, and operatively connected to the at least one actuator system via a wired connection, the protocol translation unit configured to provide, to the at least one actuator system, the power signal and the information according to a second communication protocol, wherein the protocol translation unit is configured to perform translation of the information according to the second communication protocol, (see Allgaier at Figs. 1-6; see Allgaier at the Abstract which discloses that a communication system includes a first communication module including at least one port of a first network, at least one input port and at least one output port of a second network, and a first network gateway to translate between a first protocol for the first network and a second protocol for the second network; see Allgaier at [0039] for example which discloses that: The network having a switched power line coupled with a communications channel (e.g., PoE network) passes electric power and data on cabling (e.g., twisted pair Ethernet cable). A single cable provides both a data connection and electric power to devices (e.g., communication modules, cameras, routers, sensors, controllers, etc.). A communication module can receive power from an upstream module having PoE or have a separate power supply. Power sourcing equipment (PSE) refers to devices such as network switches that source power to the PoE cable; see Allgaier at [0040] which further discloses that each communication module having a CAN device with at least one CAN port and an Ethernet device with at least one Ethernet port includes a network gateway (e.g., network gateways 241, 269, 268, 289) for translating or converting between a CAN protocol to an Ethernet protocol or from Ethernet protocol to CAN protocol; see Allgaeier, at [0041], in conjunction with Fig. 3, which illustratively depicts that FIG. 3 illustrates a communication module with one CAN port and one network port for a switched power line coupled with a communications channel (e.g., PoE port) in accordance with one embodiment that the communication module 300 includes input port 301, Ethernet port 310, CAN port 320, and network gateway 330 for translation or converting from CAN protocol to Ethernet protocol or from Ethernet protocol to CAN protocol. Examiner maps any of the network gateways of the machine or the implement to the protocol translation unit. Examiner notes that the published specification states that the protocol translation unit comprises a first processing device. Allgaier at [0028] further discloses that a machine-accessible non-transitory medium (e.g., memory 105) contains executable computer program instructions which when executed by a data processing system cause the system to perform operations or methods of the present disclosure.)
Allgaier does not expressly disclose and wherein the wired connection comprises no more than two wires to provide the power signal and the information according to the second communication protocol which in a related art Curtis teaches (see Curtis at [0058] which discloses that: With the growing need to provide cost effective power, data connectivity, and security to the large number of end point devices that will be deployed in the future, Single Pair Ethernet (SPE) has emerged as a promising technology. SPE enables data transmission over Ethernet via a single pair of wires while also providing a power supply to end devices (e.g., Power over Ethernet (PoE), Power over Data Line (PoDL)) to pass electrical power along with data to allow a single cable to provide both data connectivity and electrical power to end point devices. Examiner maps Single Pair Ethernet (SPE) to a wired connection that comprises no more than two wires to provide the power signal and the information according to the second communication protocol.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Allgaier to include wherein the wired connection comprises no more than two wires to provide the power signal and the information according to the second communication protocol, as taught by Curtis.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to pass electrical power along with data to allow a single pair of wires to provide both data connectivity and electrical power to end point devices and that new Ethernet applications are planned for use with single pair copper cables in the Enterprise, industrial applications, automotive Ethernet, and IoT devices (e.g., sensors, actuators, appliances, vehicles, lighting, health care monitoring devices, traffic control, phones, video cameras, point-of-sale devices, security access control devices and systems, residential devices, building and home automation, energy management, manufacturing equipment, smart systems, and many more applications), as suggested by Curtis at [0058].
Regarding claim 2, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the first communication protocol is one of CANOPEN protocol or ISOBUS protocol (see Allgaier at [0040] which further discloses that each communication module having a CAN device with at least one CAN port and an Ethernet device with at least one Ethernet port includes a network gateway (e.g., network gateways 241, 269, 268, 289) for translating or converting between a CAN protocol to an Ethernet protocol or from Ethernet protocol to CAN protocol.)
Regarding claim 3, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the second communication protocol is one of SCS OPEN LINK protocol, HIPERFACE DSL protocol, ENDAT 3.0 protocol or two-wire Ethernet protocol which in a related art Curtis teaches (see Curtis at [0058] which discloses that: With the growing need to provide cost effective power, data connectivity, and security to the large number of end point devices that will be deployed in the future, Single Pair Ethernet (SPE) has emerged as a promising technology. SPE enables data transmission over Ethernet via a single pair of wires while also providing a power supply to end devices (e.g., Power over Ethernet (PoE), Power over Data Line (PoDL)) to pass electrical power along with data to allow a single cable to provide both data connectivity and electrical power to end point devices. Examiner maps Single Pair Ethernet (SPE) to two-wire Ethernet protocol.)
Regarding claim 4, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the protocol translation unit comprises a first processing device separate from a second processing device [constituting at least a portion of the implement control unit] (see Allgaier at [0024-0025] in conjunction with Fig. 1 which discloses controllers 154 of implement network 150 within implement 140 and that the controllers may include processors in communication with a plurality of seed sensors. Examiner maps processors to a first processing device separate from a second processing device.)
Regarding claim 5, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein each of the at least one actuator systems comprises a driver and an actuator, and wherein the driver receives the information conforming to the second communication protocol and determines, based on the information conforming to the second communication protocol, control signals used to control operation of the actuator (see Allgaier at [0024] which discloses that sensors 152 (e.g., speed sensors, seed sensors for detecting passage of seed, downforce sensors, actuator valves, OEM sensors, flow sensors, etc.), controllers 154 (e.g., drive system for seed meter, GPS receiver), and the processing system 162 control and monitor operations of the implement. Also, see Allgaier at [0037] which discloses how a network gateway translates or converts between Ethernet and CAN protocols and in which the payload data may not change during this translation. Examiner notes that the payload information comprises information including control signals used to control operation of the actuator. Examiner notes that for the processing system to be able to control and monitor operations of the implement, the controllers or drive system use the information that has been translated into the second protocol which includes control signals to control operation of the actuator values or actuator systems.)
Regarding claim 6, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 5, wherein the information comprises at least one of commands or vehicle data conforming to the first communication protocol, and wherein the driver is configured to determine the control signals based on the at least one of the commands or vehicle data (see Allgaier at [0024] which discloses controllers 154 (e.g., drive system for seed meter, GPS receiver), and the processing system 162 control and monitor operations of the implement. Examiner notes that for the processing system to be able to control and monitor operations of the implement, the controllers or drive system use the information that has been translated into the second protocol which includes control signals to control operation of the actuator values or actuator systems; see Allgaier at [0037] which discloses that a network gateway translates or converts between a CAN protocol to an Ethernet protocol or from Ethernet protocol to CAN protocol. A communication to be translated from the CAN protocol to the Ethernet protocol includes header information with metadata and also payload data that is received from CAN controllers and sensors on an implement. The header information is translated from the CAN protocol to the Ethernet protocol while the payload data may not change during this translation. The network gateway can inspect the header information including a source identification (ID) or source address to determine a source port (e.g., CAN port, Ethernet port) that sent this communication. Then, the network gateway can determine a physical location of the source port based on the source ID; see Allgaier at [0038] which discloses that FIG. 7 illustrates an example packet 700 having header information and payload data in accordance with one embodiment. The packet 700 (e.g., Ethernet packet) may include a preamble 710 to allow devices on a network to synchronize receiver clocks, a start of frame delimiter 712, and header information 715 that includes a destination address 714, a source address 716, and a type or length field 718. Examiner notes that the payload data includes information such as commands and/or control signals which are carried to their intended physical location by way of using header information that includes a destination address by way of using the network gateway.)
Regarding claim 7, the modified Allgaeier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 5, wherein the implement control unit is configured to determine the control signals, based on at least one of commands or vehicle data conforming to the first communication protocol, wherein the information provided by the implement control unit to the protocol translation unit comprises the control signals, and wherein the driver is configured to extract the control signals from the information according to the second communication protocol (see Allgaier at [0024] which discloses controllers 154 (e.g., drive system for seed meter, GPS receiver), and the processing system 162 control and monitoring operations of the implement. Examiner notes that for the processing system to be able to control and monitor operations of the implement, the controllers or drive system use the information that has been translated into the second protocol which includes control signals to control operation of the actuator values or actuator systems. Note that Examiner previously mapped the controllers 154 and processing system 162 to the implement control unit. Also, see Allgaier at [0037] which discloses that a network gateway translates or converts between a CAN protocol to an Ethernet protocol or from Ethernet protocol to CAN protocol. A communication to be translated from the CAN protocol to the Ethernet protocol includes header information with metadata and also payload data that is received from CAN controllers and sensors on an implement. The header information is translated from the CAN protocol to the Ethernet protocol while the payload data may not change during this translation. The network gateway can inspect the header information including a source identification (ID) or source address to determine a source port (e.g., CAN port, Ethernet port) that sent this communication. Then, the network gateway can determine a physical location of the source port based on the source ID. Also, see Allgaier at [0038] which discloses that FIG. 7 illustrates an example packet 700 having header information and payload data in accordance with one embodiment. The packet 700 (e.g., Ethernet packet) may include a preamble 710 to allow devices on a network to synchronize receiver clocks, a start of frame delimiter 712, and header information 715 that includes a destination address 714, a source address 716, and a type or length field 718. Examiner notes that the payload data includes information such as commands and/or control signals which are carried to their intended physical location by way of using header information that includes a destination address by way of using the network gateway. Examiner notes that the payload data includes information such as commands and/or control signals carried to their intended physical location, such as at the driver, for example, by way of using an appropriate destination address provided by a header and the network gateway. Examiner has shown a teaching based on a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language in light of what is written in the specification.)
Regarding claim 8, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the agricultural implement is a planter (see Allgaier at [0006] which discloses that FIG. 1 shows an example of a block diagram of a system 100 that includes a machine 102 (e.g., tractor, combine harvester, etc.) and an implement 140 (e.g., planter, cultivator, plough, sprayer, spreader, irrigation implement, etc.) in accordance with one embodiment.)
Regarding claim 9, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 8, wherein each of the at least one actuator system comprises a seed meter (see Allgaier at [0024] which discloses that sensors 152 (e.g., speed sensors, seed sensors for detecting passage of seed, downforce sensors, actuator valves, OEM sensors, flow sensors, etc.), controllers 154 (e.g., drive system for seed meter, GPS receiver), and the processing system 162 control and monitor operations of the implement. Examiner notes that a drive system for a seed meter corresponds to at least one actuator system comprises a seed meter.)
Regarding claim 11, the modified Allgaier teaches the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the protocol translation unit is further configured to perform translation of the data conforming to the second communication protocol into the data conforming to the first communication protocol, and to provide the data conforming to the first communication protocol to the implement control unit (see Allgaier at [0037] which discloses that the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the protocol translation unit is further configured to perform translation of the data conforming to the second communication protocol into the data conforming to the first communication protocol, and to provide the data conforming to the first communication protocol to the implement control unit.)
Claims 12-14 recite a method that performs the steps recited in the implement of claims 1-3. The cited portions of the prior art used in the rejection of claim 1-3 teach the corresponding limitations recited in the method of claims 12-14. Therefore, claims 12-14 are rejected for the same reasons as stated for claims 1-3 above.
Claim 15 recites a method that performs the steps recited in the implement of claim 6. The cited portions of the prior art used in the rejection of claim 6 teach the corresponding limitations recited in the method of claim 15. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons as stated for claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 16, the modified Allgaier teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the information provided by the implement control unit to the protocol translation unit comprises control signals used to control one or more actuators of the at least one actuator system (see Allgaier at Fig. 2 which depicts an expandable network architecture 200 (e.g., communication system) having various communication modules located on an implement and a module located on a machine; Examiner notes that the information is communicated between the machine and the implement as illustratively disclosed in Fig. 2. Further, see Allgaier at [0024] which discloses that sensors 152 (e.g., speed sensors, seed sensors for detecting passage of seed, downforce sensors, actuator valves, OEM sensors, flow sensors, etc.), controllers 154 (e.g., drive system for seed meter, GPS receiver), and the processing system 162 control and monitor operations of the implement. Also, see Allgaier at [0037] which discloses how a network gateway translates or converts between Ethernet and CAN protocols and in which the payload data may not change during this translation. Examiner notes that the payload information comprises information including control signals used to control operation of the actuator. Examiner notes that the network gateways translate or convert the control signals which do not change during the translation. Examiner notes that for the processing system to be able to control and monitor operations of the implement, the controllers or drive system use the information that has been translated into the second protocol which includes control signals to control operation of the actuator values or actuator systems.)
Regarding claim 17, the modified Allgaier teaches the method of claim 12, further comprising: receiving, by the protocol translation unit from the at least one actuator system via the wired connection, received data conforming to the second communication protocol; translating, by the protocol translation unit, the received data conforming to the second communication protocol into translated data conforming to the first communication protocol; and providing, by the protocol translation unit, the translated data confirming to the first communication protocol to the implement control unit (see Allgaier at [0024] which discloses sensors 152 (e.g., speed sensors, seed sensors for detecting passage of seed, downforce sensors, actuator valves, OEM sensors, flow sensors, etc.), and controllers 154 (e.g., drive system for seed meter, GPS receiver), and the processing system 162 control and monitor operations of the implement; see Allgaiers at [0037] which discloses that the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the protocol translation unit is further configured to perform translation of the data conforming to the second communication protocol into the data conforming to the first communication protocol, and to provide the data conforming to the first communication protocol to the implement control unit. See Allgaier at Figs. 1-2 which illustratively depicts data transmission and/or communication between the various components, such as from the implement sensors 152, which comprise the actuator valves, to an implement gateway (e.g., 268-289) which performs the translation, and back to the controllers 154 and/or processing system 162, which corresponds to the implement control unit.)
Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as being unpatentable over Allgaier et al. (US 2021/0325868) in view of Curtis et al. (US 2020/0153174) and in further view of Goers (US 2024/0393408.)
Regarding claim 10, the modified Allgaier does not expressly disclose the agricultural implement of claim 1, wherein the wired connection comprises a shielded cable which, in a related art, Goers teaches (see Goers at [0007] which discloses that the shielded cables recommended in the 1000Base-T1 standard are of the shielded twisted pair type and that there are a plurality of different types of shielded cables available and a particularly high-quality shielded cable is known as S/FTP which means that the cables are double shielded and that they contain a twisted two-wire cable.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Allgaier to include wherein the wired connection comprises a shielded cable, as taught by Goers.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to greatly improve the EMC properties, such as radiation and interference of the communication line, as suggested by Curtis at [0007] and [0058].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROY RHEE whose telephone number is 313-446-6593. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am to 5:30 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 may contact the Examiner via telephone or 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, Kito Robinson, can be reached on 571-270-3921. 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, one may visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. In addition, more information about Patent Center may be found at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. Should you have questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ROY RHEE/Examiner, Art Unit 3664