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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 8, 11-13, 15, 16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Vandike et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0324507).
In reference to claim 1, Vandike discloses an agricultural system 100 (Fig. 1), comprising:
a header 104 (Fig. 2) comprising:
a plurality of row units 1214 (Fig. 4) distributed across a width of the header (Fig. 1), wherein at least one row unit 1214 of the plurality of row units comprises:
a pair of stalk rollers 1232 configured to engage material other than grain (MOG) of a crop and to drive the MOG toward a field (Fig. 6);
a light emitter configured to emit light a light detector configured to detect the light and to generate a signal indicative of detection of the light at the light detector (par. 0054, intake sensors 384 use “lidar”); and
a control system 314 (Fig. 7) configured to determine a level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector based on the signal (par. 0054, “MOG intake sensors 384 detect MOG intake”).
In reference to claim 4, Vandike discloses that the light emitter is configured to emit the light, and the detector is configured to detect the light (par. 0054, “lidar” involves both of these steps; no particular wavelength is disclosed but the emitter and receiver would have to emit and detect at the same wavelength to function).
In reference to claim 7, Vandike discloses that the control system 314 is configured to provide a control signal to adjust a rotation rate of the pair of stalk rollers 1232 based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector (par. 0073, “control the speed of one or more components of the header 104, such as the gathering chains 1230, the stalk rollers 1232”; “Header speed controllers 332 illustratively generate control signals based on sensor data provided by sensors 308 (e.g., MOG intake characteristic data provided by MOG intake characteristic sensors”).
In reference to claim 8, Vandike discloses that the control system 314 is configured to provide a control signal to adjust a travel speed (par. 0077, “propulsion system”) of the agricultural system based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector (pars. 0073 and 0077).
In reference to claim 11, Vandike discloses that the header 104 comprises one or more sensors 383 positioned at the at least one row unit 1214, the one or more sensors 383 generate an additional signal indicative of an additional level of butt-shelling at the at least one row unit 1214 (par. 0053), and the control system 314 is configured to determine the additional level of the butt-shelling at the at least one row unit 1214.
In reference to claim 12, Vandike discloses that the control system 314 is configured to provide a control signal to adjust a rotation rate of the pair of stalk rollers 1232 (par. 0073), a width of a gap between a pair of deck plates of the at least one row unit 1214 (par. 0075), a travel speed of the header (par. 0077, “propulsion system”), or any combination thereof based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector and the additional level of the butt-shelling at the at least one row unit 1214 (pars. 0053 and 0073).
In reference to claim 13, Vandike discloses that the control system utilizes machine learning algorithms to determine the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector based on the signal and to determine an appropriate adjustment for one or more components of the header 104 based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector (par. 0087).
In reference to claim 15, Vandike discloses a method of operating an agricultural system, the method comprising:
emitting a light with a light emitter positioned at a row unit 1214 of a header 104 (par. 0054, “lidar”);
detecting the light with a light detector positioned at the row unit 124124 of the header 104 (par. 0054, “lidar”); and
determining, with a control system 314 (Fig. 7), a level of material other than grain (MOG) of a crop between the light emitter and the light detector at the row unit 1214 of the header 104 (par. 0054).
In reference to claim 16, Vandike discloses providing, with the control system 314, control signals to adjust a rotation rate of a pair of stalk rollers 1232 based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector (par. 0073, “control the speed of one or more components of the header 104, such as the gathering chains 1230, the stalk rollers 1232”; “Header speed controllers 332 illustratively generate control signals based on sensor data provided by sensors 308 (e.g., MOG intake characteristic data provided by MOG intake characteristic sensors”).
In reference to claim 18, Vandike discloses detecting, with one or more sensors, an additional level of butt-shelling at the row unit 1214 of the header 104 (par. 0053); and
providing, with the control system 314, control signals to adjust a rotation rate of a pair of stalk rollers 1232 (par. 0073), a width of a gap between deck plates (par. 0075), a travel speed of the header (par. 0077, “propulsion system”), or any combination thereof based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector and the additional level of the butt-shelling at the row unit 1214 of the header 104 (pars. 0053 and 0073).
In reference to claim 19, Vandike discloses determining, with the control system 314 and using a machine learning algorithms, an appropriate adjustment to one or more components of the header 104 based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector at the row unit 1214 of the header (par. 0087).
In reference to claim 20, Vandike discloses a header 104 for an agricultural system 100 (Fig. 2), the header comprising:
a plurality of row units 1214 distributed across a width of the header 104 (Fig. 4), wherein at least one row unit of the plurality of row units 1214 comprises:
a pair of stalk rollers 1232 configured to engage material other than grain (MOG) of a crop and to drive the MOG toward a field (Fig. 6, par. 0046);
a light emitter configured to emit light (par. 0054, “lidar”); and
a light detector configured to detect the light and to generate a signal indicative of detection of the light at the light detector (par. 0054, “lidar”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 9, 10, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vandike et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0324507) in view of VanNahmen (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0110394).
In reference to claim 2, Vandike fails to disclose that the light emitter and the light detector are positioned at a rear portion of the at least one row unit.
VanNahmen discloses that a light emitter and a light detector 110 (par. 0036, “LIDAR”) can be positioned at a rear portion of a row unit (Fig. 7). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to dispose a light emitter/detector at a rear portion of a row unit with a reasonable expectation of success as it amounts to a relocation of the existing parts of the invention without altering their function.
In reference to claim 9, Vandike fails to disclose that the header comprises one or more sensors positioned between the plurality of row units and a conveyor along a longitudinal axis of the header, the one or more sensors generate an additional signal indicative of an additional level of the MOG between the plurality of row units and the conveyor, and the control system is configured to determine the additional level of the MOG between the plurality of row units and the conveyor.
VanNahmen discloses one or more sensors 110 positioned between the plurality of row units and a conveyor along a longitudinal axis of the header 10 (Fig. 9, pars. 0047 and 0048), the one or more sensors 110 generate an additional signal indicative of an additional level of the MOG (par. 0036) between the plurality of row units and the conveyor, and the control system 120 is configured to determine the additional level of the MOG between the plurality of row units and the conveyor.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to dispose one or more sensors between the row units and a conveyor of the header with a reasonable expectation of success so that additional MOG measurements can be taken.
In reference to claim 10, Vandike discloses that the control system 314 is configured to provide a control signal to adjust a rotation rate of the pair of stalk rollers 1232 (par. 0073), a width of a gap between a pair of deck plates (par. 0075) of the at least one row unit 1214, a travel speed of the header 104 (par. 0077, “propulsion system”), or any combination thereof based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector and the additional level of MOG (par. 0073). In combination with VanNahmen, this would result in those actions being taken in response to MOG measurements made between the plurality of row units and the conveyor.
In reference to claim 14, Vandike discloses that the at least one row unit 1214 comprises a first row unit and a second row unit (Fig. 4), and the first row unit and the second row unit each comprises:
a respective pair of stalk rollers 1232 configured to engage material other than grain (MOG) of the crop and to drive the MOG toward the field (Fig. 6).
Vandike fails to disclose that each row unit comprises a respective light emitter configured to emit respective light; and a respective light detector configured to detect the respective light and to generate a respective signal indicative of detection of the respective light at the respective light detector.
VanNahmen discloses that each row unit that each row unit a respective light emitter configured to emit respective light; and a respective light detector configured to detect the respective light and to generate a respective signal indicative of detection of the respective light at the respective light detector (Fig. 7, par. 0036, each sensor unit 110 is a “LIDAR” emitter/detector).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include an emitter/detector on each row unit with a reasonable expectation of success so that additional MOG measurements can be taken.
In reference to claim 17, Vandike fails to disclose detecting, with one or more sensors, an additional level of the MOG between the row unit of the header and a conveyor of a header; and
providing, with the control system, control signals to adjust a rotation rate of a pair of stalk rollers, a width of a gap between deck plates, a travel speed of the header, or any combination thereof based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector and the additional level of the MOG between the row unit of the header and the conveyor of the header.
VanNahmen discloses detecting, with one or more sensors 110, an additional level of the MOG (par. 0036) between the row unit of the header 10 and a conveyor of a header 10 (Fig. 9, pars. 0047 and 0048); and providing, with the control system 120, control signals to adjust the header 10.
In combination with Vandike this would result in the control system adjusting a rotation rate of a pair of stalk rollers 1232 (par. 0073), a width of a gap between a pair of deck plates (par. 0075), a travel speed of the header 104 (par. 0077, “propulsion system”), or any combination thereof based on the level of the MOG between the light emitter and the light detector and the additional level of MOG (par. 0073).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to dispose one or more sensors between the row units and a conveyor of the header with a reasonable expectation of success so that additional MOG measurements can be taken.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5 and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schade et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0196575) discloses an emitter 64 and detector 66 for measuring MOG (par. 0042, Fig. 2); Hermann (US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0354055) discloses sensors 62A-62D for measuring MOG on a header (par. 0051, Fig. 2); and Hunt et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0055158) discloses emitters 202 and detectors 204 for measuring on a header 110 (Fig. 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRAD HARCOURT whose telephone number is (571)272-7303. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9am to 6pm.
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, Doug Hutton can be reached at (571)272-4137. 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.
/BRAD HARCOURT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674
9/03/26
Prosecution Insights