DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s argument/remarks filed on June 1, 2026, claims 1-20 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of a new ground(s) of rejection. Applicant has amended claims 1, 10, and 16 and added claim 21-22 .
Response to Argument
Regarding applicant’s arguments with respect to the amendment of the claims, applicant is kindly invited to consider the Office Action below to view the new ground of rejection, cited sections and motivation.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-6, 9-13, 16-18 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis (Pub No.: US 2024/0344850 A1) in view of Missotten et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0394926 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Davis discloses a system for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration comprising:
a perception sensor (e.g., sensors (112, 114, 116) / camera) associated with a work machine (e.g., sensors / camera onboard a work vehicle – par. 56) and configured to capture an image indicative of one or more characteristics (e.g., camera configured to capture image surrounding the work vehicle; for instance, crop row, line on a road – par. 56 and 53 and Figure 1 );
a perception pose actuator controllable to change a pose of the perception sensor during operation of the work machine (e.g., move the camera from a first location to a second location, which requires an actuator(s) – par 48);
one or more processors (e.g., vehicle control unit / controller 120 – par. 44); and
memory (e.g., memory- par. 42) storing instructions, executable by the one or more processors, that, when executed by the one or more processors (e.g., the memory configured to store program / information and be executed by the vehicle control unit / controller (processor) – par. 42), cause the one or more processors to:
execute, during operation of the work machine and in response to a calibration
trigger (e.g., move the camera from a first location to a second location – par 48), a calibration operation to generate a calibration transformation (e.g., as the camera’s location / orientation changes is detected, initiate a calibration mode by triggering calibration process (par. 48) and calculate calibration parameter (par. 57));
and
control the work machine (e.g., enable the work vehicle to automatically calibrate one or many sensors /cameras whenever the appropriate conditions are met to self-detect respective camera to vehicle orientations, or orientation of a given camera (par. 46) ) based, at least, on the calibration transformation and the image (e.g., based on calculated calibration parameter (par. 57) and captured image (par. 56 and 53)).
However, Davis failed to specifically disclose control the perception pose actuator to change the pose of the perception sensor based on a criterion, wherein the criterion includes one or more of:
However, Missotten et al. teach a threshing control system for an agricultural harvester configures to adjust the position and / or orientation of a camera 80 (par. 34 and 44) via an actuator 85 based on chopping process and crop residue flowing (limitation: machine performance data) from the threshing system (par. 44 and Figures 5a-5b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the work vehicle comprising a camera as taught by Davis, such that the work vehicle is configured to adjust the position and / or orientation of the camera via an actuator based on chopping process and crop residue flowing from its threshing system, in view of Missotten et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of adjusting a chopper speed and knife bar position of the work vehicle to obtain better chopping quality and/or lower power consumption (par. 43).
Regarding claim 2, Davis discloses an automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to identify one or more parameters of the perception sensor based on the calibration operation (e.g., determine converting parameters associated with the one or more persistent external references into the coordinate frame associated with the work vehicle – par. 19).
Regarding claim 3, Davis discloses an automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the one or more parameters include one or more of: (i) one or more extrinsic parameters;e.g., determine the location and orientation of the camera (par. 56-57)).
Note: the limitation extrinsic parameters is related to location and orientation of the camera – see pub. par. 72.
Regarding claim 4, Davis discloses an automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the calibration trigger is indicative of a change in pose of the perception sensor (e.g., as the camera’s location / orientation changes is detected, initiate a calibration mode or a confirmation mode for determining whether the current calibration settings for the camera require adjustment – par 48).
Regarding claim 5, Davis discloses an automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors (e.g., vehicle control unit / controller 120 – par. 44), cause the one or more processors to control perception pose actuator to change the pose of the perception sensor based on criteria (e.g., move the camera from a first location to a second location (par. 48) based on crop row or line on a road ( 53 and Figure 1), which requires an actuator(s) to be controlled for moving the camera).
Regarding claim 6, Davis discloses an automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the criteria includes one or more of: (i) environmental data (e.g., sensor(s) / camera detects persistent external reference points such as the crop rows 110 (par. 38)) (
Regarding claim 9, Davis discloses an automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the work machine comprises an agricultural harvester (e.g., wherein the work vehicle is related to agriculture vehicle (par. 31 and Figure 1) ).
Regarding claim 10, Davis discloses a method for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, method comprising:
detecting a calibration trigger associated with a perception sensor corresponding to the work machine (e.g., detecting a movement of a camera of a work vehicle from a first location to a second location – par 48);
executing, during the operation of the work machine and in response to the detected calibration trigger (e.g., move the camera from a first location to a second location – par 48), a calibration operation to generate a calibration transformation (e.g., as the camera’s location / orientation changes is detected, initiate a calibration mode by triggering calibration process (par. 48) and calculate calibration parameter (par. 57)); and
controlling the work machine whenever the appropriate conditions are met to self-detect respective camera to vehicle orientations, or orientation of a given camera (par. 46) ) based, at least, on the calibration transformation (e.g., based on calculated calibration parameter (par. 57)).
However, Davis failed to specifically disclose control the perception pose actuator to change the pose of the perception sensor based on a criterion, wherein the criterion includes one or more of:
However, Missotten et al. teach a threshing control system for an agricultural harvester configures to adjust the position and / or orientation of a camera 80 (par. 34 and 44) via an actuator 85 based on chopping process and crop residue flowing (limitation: machine performance data) from the threshing system (par. 44 and Figures 5a-5b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the work vehicle comprising a camera as taught by Davis, such that the work vehicle is configured to adjust the position and / or orientation of the camera via an actuator based on chopping process and crop residue flowing from its threshing system, in view of Missotten et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of adjusting a chopper speed and knife bar position of the work vehicle to obtain better chopping quality and/or lower power consumption (par. 43).
Regarding claim 11, Davis discloses a method for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration further comprising identifying one or more parameters of the perception sensor based on the calibration operation (e.g., determine converting parameters associated with the one or more persistent external references into the coordinate frame associated with the work vehicle – par. 19).
Regarding claim 12, Davis discloses a method for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein identifying one or more parameters of the perception sensor comprises identifying one or more of: (i) one or more extrinsic parameters of the perception sensor; e.g., determine the location and orientation of the camera (par. 56-57)).
Note: the limitation extrinsic parameters is related to location and orientation of the camera – see pub. par. 72.
Regarding claim 13, Davis discloses a method for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein detecting the calibration trigger comprises obtaining data indicative of a change in pose of the perception sensor (e.g., as the camera’s location / orientation changes is detected, initiate a calibration mode or a confirmation mode for determining whether the current calibration settings for the camera require adjustment – par 48).
Regarding claim 16, Davis discloses work vehicle for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration comprising:
a perception sensor (e.g., sensors (112, 114, 116) / camera) configured to capture an image indicative of one or more characteristics (e.g., camera configured to capture image surrounding the work vehicle; for instance, crop row, line on a road – par. 56 and 53 and Figure 1);
a perception pose actuator controllable to change a pose of the perception sensor during operation of the work machine (e.g., move the camera from a first location to a second location, which requires an actuator(s) – par 48);
one or more processors (e.g., vehicle control unit / controller 120 – par. 44); and
memory (e.g., memory- par. 42) storing instructions, executable by the one or more processors, that, when executed by the one or more processors (e.g., the memory configured to store program / information and be executed by the vehicle control unit / controller (processor) – par. 42), configure the one or more processors to:
execute, during the operation of the work machine and in response to a calibration trigger (e.g., move the camera from a first location to a second location – par 48), a calibration operation to generate a calibration transformation (e.g., as the camera’s location / orientation changes is detected, initiate a calibration mode by triggering calibration process (par. 48) and calculate calibration parameter (par. 57)); and
control the work machine (e.g., enable the work vehicle to automatically calibrate one or many sensors /cameras whenever the appropriate conditions are met to self-detect respective camera to vehicle orientations, or orientation of a given camera (par. 46) ) based, at least, on the calibration transformation (e.g., based on calculated calibration parameter (par. 57)).
However, Davis failed to specifically disclose control the perception pose actuator to change the pose of the perception sensor based on a criterion, wherein the criterion includes one or more of:
However, Missotten et al. teach a threshing control system for an agricultural harvester configures to adjust the position and / or orientation of a camera 80 (par. 34 and 44) via an actuator 85 based on chopping process and crop residue flowing (limitation: machine performance data) from the threshing system (par. 44 and Figures 5a-5b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the work vehicle comprising a camera as taught by Davis, such that the work vehicle is configured to adjust the position and / or orientation of the camera via an actuator based on chopping process and crop residue flowing from its threshing system, in view of Missotten et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of adjusting a chopper speed and knife bar position of the work vehicle to obtain better chopping quality and/or lower power consumption (par. 43).
Regarding claim 17, Davis discloses work vehicle for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, configure the one or more processors to identify, based on the calibration operation, one or more of: (i) one or more extrinsic parameters of the perception sensor; e.g., determine the location and orientation of the camera (par. 56-57)).
Note: the limitation extrinsic parameters is related to location and orientation of the camera – see pub. par. 72.
Regarding claim 18, Davis discloses work vehicle for automated recognition and performance of vehicle to camera calibration, wherein the calibration trigger is indicative of a change in pose of the perception sensor (e.g., as the camera’s location / orientation changes is detected, initiate a calibration mode or a confirmation mode for determining whether the current calibration settings for the camera require adjustment – par 48) and comprises one of: sensor data indicative of detected movement of the perception sensor (e.g., detecting movement of the camera from a first location to a second location, which requires an actuator(s) – par 48);;
Regarding claim 21, the claim limitations recited features on alternative form of rejected claim 1; therefore, Davis’s invention, as modified by Missotten et al. still read on the claimed combination alternative form.
Regarding claim 22, Davis, as modified by Missotten et al., teach wherein the criterion includes machine performance data – refers to rejected claim 1.
Claim 7-8, 14-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis (Pub No.: US 2024/0344850 A1) in view of Missotten et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0394926 A1) and Wu et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0360850 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Davis, as modified by Missotten et al., failed to specifically disclose cause the one or more processors to control the work machine by controlling one or more controllable subsystems of the work machine.
However, Wu et al. disclose a vehicle / grain processing host comprising a processor (35) (par. 95 and Figure 1) configured to adjust a travel direction of the vehicle (par. 80 and 9) based on the crop information identified by the image processing system (par. 31) and adjusted image (par. 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to further modify vehicle control unit / controller (processor), as taught by the combination of Davis in view of Missotten et al., such that the work vehicle’s processor is configured to adjust a travel direction of the vehicle based on the crop information identified by the image processing system and adjusted image, in view of Wu et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of accurately determine a farmland areas and the course of operation of the vehicle to follow a set path and avoid serious mechanical failure (par. 4).
Regarding claim 8, Davis, as modified by Missotten et al., failed to specifically disclose, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to control the work machine by controlling one or more interface mechanisms of the work machine.
However, Wu et al. disclose a vehicle / grain processing host comprising a processor 35 (par. 95 and Figure 1) configured to adjust the operation parameter of the vehicle operation system during driving based (i) on the acquired information, such as operation speed, width, and height and parameters of cutting or threshing. (par. 105 and 142) and (ii) the crop information identified by the image processing system (par. 31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to further modify vehicle control unit / controller (processor), as taught by the combination of Davis in view of Missotten et al., such that the work vehicle’s processor is configured to adjust the operation parameter of the vehicle operation system during driving based (i) on the acquired information and (ii) the crop information identified by the image processing system, in view of Wu et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of accurately determine a farmland areas and the course of operation of the vehicle to follow a set path and avoid serious mechanical failure (par. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Davis, as modified by Missotten et al., failed to specifically disclose wherein controlling the work machine comprises controlling one or more controllable subsystems of the work machine.
However, Wu et al. disclose a vehicle / grain processing host comprising a processor (35) (par. 95 and Figure 1) configured to adjust a travel direction of the vehicle (par. 80 and 9) based on the crop information identified by the image processing system (par. 31) and adjusted image (par. 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to further modify vehicle control unit / controller (processor), as taught by the combination of Davis in view of Missotten et al., such that the work vehicle’s processor is configured to adjust a travel direction of the vehicle based on the crop information identified by the image processing system and adjusted image, in view of Wu et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of accurately determine a farmland areas and the course of operation of the vehicle to follow a set path and avoid serious mechanical failure (par. 4).
Regarding claim 15, Davis failed, as modified by Missotten et al., to specifically disclose wherein controlling the work machine comprises controlling one or more interface mechanisms of the work machine.
However, Wu et al. disclose a vehicle / grain processing host comprising a processor 35 (par. 95 and Figure 1) configured to adjust the operation parameter of the vehicle operation system during driving based (i) on the acquired information, such as operation speed, width, and height and parameters of cutting or threshing. (par. 105 and 142) and (ii) the crop information identified by the image processing system (par. 31)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to further modify vehicle control unit / controller (processor), as taught by the combination of Davis in view of Missotten et al., such that the work vehicle’s processor is configured to adjust the operation parameter of the vehicle operation system during driving based (i) on the acquired information and (ii) the crop information identified by the image processing system, in view of Wu et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of accurately determine a farmland areas and the course of operation of the vehicle to follow a set path and avoid serious mechanical failure (par. 4).
Regarding claim 19, Davis failed, as modified by Missotten et al., to specifically disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, configure the one or more processors to control the work machine by controlling one or more controllable subsystems of the work machine.
However, Wu et al. disclose a vehicle / grain processing host comprising a processor (35) (par. 95 and Figure 1) configured to adjust a travel direction of the vehicle (par. 80 and 9) based on the crop information identified by the image processing system (par. 31) and adjusted image (par. 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to further modify vehicle control unit / controller (processor), as taught by the combination of Davis in view of Missotten et al., such that the work vehicle’s processor is configured to adjust a travel direction of the vehicle based on the crop information identified by the image processing system and adjusted image, in view of Wu et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of accurately determine a farmland areas and the course of operation of the vehicle to follow a set path and avoid serious mechanical failure (par. 4).
Regarding claim 20, Davis failed, as modified by Missotten et al., to specifically disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, configure the one or more processors to control the work machine by controlling one or more interface mechanisms of the work machine.
However, Wu et al. disclose a vehicle / grain processing host comprising a processor 35 (par. 95 and Figure 1) configured to adjust the operation parameter of the vehicle operation system during driving based (i) on the acquired information, such as operation speed, width, and height and parameters of cutting or threshing. (par. 105 and 142) and (ii) the crop information identified by the image processing system (par. 31)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to further modify vehicle control unit / controller (processor), as taught by the combination of Davis in view of Missotten et al., such that the work vehicle’s processor is configured to adjust the operation parameter of the vehicle operation system during driving based (i) on the acquired information and (ii) the crop information identified by the image processing system, in view of Wu et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of accurately determine a farmland areas and the course of operation of the vehicle to follow a set path and avoid serious mechanical failure (par. 4).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Schoff et al. (US 2024/0404108 A1) is directed to an agricultural vehicle configured to calibrate a camera as the vehicle is moving.
O’Connor et al. (US 2024/0138313 A1) is directed to an agricultural vehicle configured to control the position of optical sensor based upon location of the receiving vehicle relative to the leading vehicle.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Jorge O. Peche whose telephone number is (571)270-1339. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM - 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 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, Khoi H. Tran can be reached at 571 272 6919. 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.
/J.O.P/ Examiner, Art Unit 3656 /KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights