DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on December 26, 2024. Claims 1-15 are pending and examined below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2022-103962, filed on June 28, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 26, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
The abstract is 151 words. 37 CFR 1.72 recommends that the abstract not exceed 150 words.
Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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:
“steering device” in claim 1, described in Applicant' s specification as “The steering device 106 includes a steering wheel, a steering shaft connected to the steering wheel, and a power steering device to assist in the steering by the steering wheel.”, [0055]
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.
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.
Claims 2 and 3 are 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.
As to claim 2, the limitation “a value of the target steering angle” at line 10 is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear to the Examiner if this is the same “a value of the target steering angle” previously recited in claim 1 or different. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the limitation to be “the value of the target steering angle”.
Further, the limitation “a value of a previous target steering angle” at lines 9-10 is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear to the Examiner if this is the same “a value of a previous target steering angle” previously recited at line 6 or different. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the limitation to be “the value of the previous target steering angle”.
As to claim 3, the limitation “a value of the target steering angle” at line 10 is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear to the Examiner if this is the same “a value of the target steering angle” previously recited in claim 1 or different. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the limitation to be “the value of the target steering angle”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 10, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, and further in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, respectively.
As to claim 1, MINAISHI teaches a work vehicle to perform self-traveling among a plurality of crop rows (see at least paragraph 5, MINAISHI), the work vehicle comprising:
wheels responsible for steering (see at least paragraphs 11 regarding the front wheels 7, 7 are supported at the lower front of the main frames 6L and 6R via the front axle case 92F, and the rear wheels 8, 8 are supported at the lower rear of the main frames 6L and 6R via the rear axle case 92R, MINAISHI);
a steering device to change a steering angle of the wheels responsible for steering (see at least paragraph 11 regarding steering handle 12 is provided above the operation panel 11. The operation panel 11 and the steering handle 12 together constitute the control section of the spraying machine 101. See also at least paragraphs 35-41, MINAISHI);
an exterior sensor to output sensor data indicating a distribution of geographic features around the work vehicle (see at least paragraphs 34-35 regarding the plant tracking sensor 123 is used to detect crops planted at predetermined intervals in the field, so as not to run over the crops with the wheels of the spraying machine 101, and to control the direction of travel of the spraying machine 101. See also at least paragraph 41, MINAISHI); and
a controller configured or programmed to (see at least FIG. 4, MINAISHI):
control self-traveling of the work vehicle (see at least paragraphs 34-35 regarding the autonomous driving program 121 stored in the processing unit 110 transmits signals to the autonomous operation means 124 for autonomously controlling the speed, posture, engine speed, steering angle, etc., of the spraying machine 101, MINAISHI);
detect two crop rows existing on opposite sides of the work vehicle based on the sensor data (see at least paragraphs 34-41 regarding detecting crops planted at predetermined intervals in the field, so as not to run over the crops with the wheels of the spraying machine 101. … to create an autonomous driving path that allows the wheels to pass between rows of crop plants and to avoid running over the crops planted in the field. However, GPS itself cannot individually detect crops planted in a field. Therefore, the plant-following sensor 123 detects the location where the crops are planted. The plant-following sensor 123 detects the distance from the plant of a crop planted in the field to the sensor, thereby controlling the steering of the spraying implement 101 so that the front wheels 7,7 and rear wheels 8,8 travel between rows and do not run over the plants, MINAISHI);
set a target path for the work vehicle in between the two crop rows (see at least paragraphs 34-41 regarding the plant-following sensor 123 detects the location where the crops are planted, and based on this detection information, the GPS-based autonomous driving route is corrected to achieve both uniform spraying of the pesticide solution and prevention of crop damage caused by running over them with wheels, MINAISHI).
MINAISHI does not explicitly teach setting a maximum steering angle for the wheels responsible for steering, based on a state of at least one of the work vehicle or a surrounding environment of the work vehicle.
However, such matter is taught by IWAMI (see at least paragraphs 25-29 regarding the steering upper limit setting unit 760 is incorporated in the target steering calculation unit 76, and the steering upper limit setting unit 760 calculates the steering upper limit by using the first steering value, the second steering value, and the target steering For the value, it has the function to clamp its upper limit, that is, the upper limiter function. It is preferable that this upper limit value also varies with the vehicle speed. That is, by setting the maximum target steering value to be output as the vehicle speed increases, steering stability at high speed driving is improved).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of IWAMI which teaches setting a maximum steering angle for the wheels responsible for steering, based on a state of at least one of the work vehicle or a surrounding environment of the work vehicle with the system of MINAISHI as both systems are directed to a system and method for autonomous guidance and steering control of a work vehicle based on sensor data, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of setting a maximum steering angle for the wheels responsible for steering, based on a state of at least one of the work vehicle or a surrounding environment of the work vehicle and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI.
MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI, does not explicitly teach computing a target steering angle for the wheels responsible for steering to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path; limiting a value of the target steering angle to be equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle; or controlling the steering device so that the steering angle of the wheels responsible for steering equals the target steering angle.
However, Sakaguchi teaches computing a target steering angle for the wheels responsible for steering to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path (see at least paragraphs 65-70 regarding the steering amount calculator 41 calculates a steering amount for correcting locational shifting and directional shifting based on the locational shifting calculated by the locational shifting amount calculator 57 and the directional shifting calculated by the directional shifting amount calculator 58); limiting a value of the target steering angle to be equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle (see at least paragraphs 65-70 regarding the steering amount limiter 42 limits the steering amount calculated by the steering amount calculator 41 based on the current steering amount. The steering amount limiter 42 prohibits the steering amount calculator 41 from calculating a steering amount causing a change from one side of the left and right sides to the other side of the left and right sides over the neutral position (Sn). For example, if the current steering amount is SL(α), a change of the steering amount to SR(β) over Sn (reverse steering) is prohibited. That is, there is a limitation to a change of the steering amount from SL(α) to Sn. Similarly, if the current steering amount is SR(β), a change of the steering amount to SL(α) over Sn (reverse steering) is prohibited. That is, there is a limitation to a change of the steering amount from SR(β) to Sn as shown in FIG. 7. Here, a is greater than 0° and smaller than or equal to the maximum steering amount (maximum steering angle), and β is greater than 0° and smaller than or equal to the maximum steering amount (maximum steering angle)); and controlling the steering device so that the steering angle of the wheels responsible for steering equals the target steering angle (see at least Abstract regarding a steering travel apparatus for performing leftward turning based on a leftward steering amount with respect to a straight-forward direction and performing rightward turning based on a rightward steering amount with respect to a neutral position. See also at least FIG.6 and paragraphs 55-60 and 65-70 regarding the output processor 503 is connected to various operation apparatuses 70 via an apparatus driver 65. A travel apparatus group 71 including travel-related apparatuses and a working apparatus group 72 including work-related apparatuses are provided as the operation apparatuses 70. The travel apparatus group 71 includes a steering apparatus 710, an engine apparatus, a transmission apparatus, and a brake apparatus, for example. A steering controller 510 included in the travel controller 51 calculates a steering amount based on the locational shifting amount calculated by the locational shifting amount calculator 57 and the directional shifting amount calculated by the directional shifting amount calculator 58, and then outputs the steering amount to the steering apparatus 710. That is, the steering controller 510 performs steering control such that the locational shifting amount and directional shifting amount between a target travel route set by the travel route setter 54 and the location of the subject vehicle calculated by the subject vehicle location calculator 55 are reduced).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Sakaguchi which teaches computing a target steering angle for the wheels responsible for steering to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path; limiting a value of the target steering angle to be equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle; and controlling the steering device so that the steering angle of the wheels responsible for steering equals the target steering angle with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI, as both systems are directed to a system and method for autonomous guidance and steering control of a work vehicle based on sensor data, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of computing a target steering angle for the wheels responsible for steering to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path; limiting a value of the target steering angle to be equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle; and controlling the steering device so that the steering angle of the wheels responsible for steering equals the target steering angle and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI.
As to claim 4, MINAISHI does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured or programmed to set the maximum steering angle based on at least one of: a traveling speed of the work vehicle; a wheelbase of the work vehicle; a size of an implement connected to the work vehicle; a curvature of the two crop rows; an angle of a dip of a current location of the work vehicle; a size of a distance between the two crop rows; or a difference between the distance between the two crop rows and a width of the work vehicle.
However, such matter is taught by IWAMI (see at least paragraphs 25-29 regarding the steering upper limit setting unit 760 is incorporated in the target steering calculation unit 76, and the steering upper limit setting unit 760 calculates the steering upper limit by using the first steering value, the second steering value, and the target steering For the value, it has the function to clamp its upper limit, that is, the upper limiter function. It is preferable that this upper limit value also varies with the vehicle speed. That is, by setting the maximum target steering value to be output as the vehicle speed increases, steering stability at high speed driving is improved).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of IWAMI which teaches setting the maximum steering angle based on at least one of: a traveling speed of the work vehicle; a wheelbase of the work vehicle; a size of an implement connected to the work vehicle; a curvature of the two crop rows; an angle of a dip of a current location of the work vehicle; a size of a distance between the two crop rows; or a difference between the distance between the two crop rows and a width of the work vehicle with the system of MINAISHI as both systems are directed to a system and method for autonomous guidance and steering control of a work vehicle based on sensor data, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of setting the maximum steering angle based on at least one of: a traveling speed of the work vehicle; a wheelbase of the work vehicle; a size of an implement connected to the work vehicle; a curvature of the two crop rows; an angle of a dip of a current location of the work vehicle; a size of a distance between the two crop rows; or a difference between the distance between the two crop rows and a width of the work vehicle and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI.
As to claim 5, MINAISHI does not explicitly teach changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a traveling speed of the work vehicle; or making the maximum steering angle smaller when the traveling speed is larger than when the traveling speed is smaller.
However, such matter is taught by IWAMI (see at least paragraphs 25-29 regarding the steering upper limit setting unit 760 is incorporated in the target steering calculation unit 76, and the steering upper limit setting unit 760 calculates the steering upper limit by using the first steering value, the second steering value, and the target steering For the value, it has the function to clamp its upper limit, that is, the upper limiter function. It is preferable that this upper limit value also varies with the vehicle speed. That is, by setting the maximum target steering value to be output as the vehicle speed increases, steering stability at high speed driving is improved. The maximum target steering value to be outputted is set to decrease as the vehicle speed increases).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of IWAMI which teaches changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a traveling speed of the work vehicle; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the traveling speed is larger than when the traveling speed is smaller with the system of MINAISHI as both systems are directed to a system and method for autonomous guidance and steering control of a work vehicle based on sensor data, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a traveling speed of the work vehicle; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the traveling speed is larger than when the traveling speed is smaller and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI.
As to claim 10, MINAISHI teaches wherein the controller is configured or programmed to: change the maximum steering angle in accordance with a difference between a distance between the two crop rows and a width of the work vehicle; and make the maximum steering angle smaller when the difference is smaller than when the difference is larger (see at least paragraphs 46-53 regarding the distance between the left and right wheels of the spraying machine 101 is configured to be substantially an integral multiple of the distance between the strips determined by the growing condition of the crop. Therefore, the distance M.sub.L.sub.・ MBy performing the steering control so that R becomes substantially equal, the front wheels 7, 7 of the spraying machine 101 travel in the spaces, and the crop is not stepped on by the wheels. By performing the steering control of the spraying work machine 101 so that Δφ obtained by (Equation 7) becomes substantially equal to zero, the spraying work machine 101 runs substantially parallel to the crop stock row (stripe). Is possible. As described above, the rotation angle θ (θ.sub.LAnd θ.sub.R), The distance deviation ΔD and the angle deviation Δφ can be obtained. As a result, the direction of the crop line (row) in the field, which cannot be directly detected by the GPS unit 102, and the position of each crop line are detected, and the spraying machine 101 can autonomously travel without stepping on the crop. It is possible, MINAISHI).
As to claim 14, Examiner notes claim 14 recites similar limitations to claim 1 and is rejected under the same rational.
As to claim 15, Examiner notes claim 15 recites similar limitations to claim 1 and is rejected under the same rational.
Claim(s) 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of TSUJI et al., JP 2022039224 A, hereinafter referred to as TSUJI, respectively.
As to claim 2, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, updating a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle; or when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, maintaining a value of a previous target steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device.
However, TSUJI teaches when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, updating a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle (see at least paragraph 43 regarding the control unit 210 determines the steering angle φ of the tire for a given steering angle based on the steering angle of the steering wheel and the corresponding relationship data. If the steering angle is less than the maximum steering angle, the control unit 210 determines the steering angle φ of the tire based on the steering angle and the corresponding relationship data); and when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, maintaining a value of a previous target steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device (see at least paragraphs 19 and 43 regarding if the steering angle is greater than or equal to the maximum steering angle, the control unit 210 may acquire the stopper angle stored in the memory unit 220 as the steering angle φ of the tire. Here, when the steering angle is a positive value, the maximum steering angle on the right is used as the maximum steering angle. Furthermore, when the steering angle is a negative value, the maximum steering angle on the left is used as the maximum steering angle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of TSUJI which teaches when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, updating a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle; and when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, maintaining a value of a previous target steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling steering of a vehicle based on sensor-detected conditions, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, updating a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle; and when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, maintaining a value of a previous target steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
As to claim 3, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, update a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle; or when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, adopt a value of the maximum steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device.
However, TSUJI teaches when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, updating a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle (see at least paragraph 43 regarding the control unit 210 determines the steering angle φ of the tire for a given steering angle based on the steering angle of the steering wheel and the corresponding relationship data. If the steering angle is less than the maximum steering angle, the control unit 210 determines the steering angle φ of the tire based on the steering angle and the corresponding relationship data); and when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, adopting a value of the maximum steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device (see at least paragraph 43 regarding if the steering angle is greater than or equal to the maximum steering angle, the control unit 210 replaces the steering angle with the maximum steering angle and determines the steering angle φ of the tire based on the maximum steering angle and the corresponding relationship data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of TSUJI which teaches when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, updating a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle; and when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, adopting a value of the maximum steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling steering of a vehicle based on sensor-detected conditions, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of when the computed target steering angle is equal to or smaller than the maximum steering angle, updating a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device from a value of a previous target steering angle to a value of the computed target steering angle; and when the computed target steering angle is greater than the maximum steering angle, adopting a value of the maximum steering angle as a value of the target steering angle to be used to control the steering device and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of FERRARI et al., WO 2018185261 A1, hereinafter referred to as FERRARI, respectively.
As to claim 6, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a size of an implement connected to the work vehicle; or making the maximum steering angle smaller when the size of the implement is larger than when the size of the implement is smaller.
However, such matter is taught by FERRARI (see at least paragraph 28 regarding the electronic control unit 8 may be provided with a console for data entry for entering (manually or by means of an ISOBUS communication) the dimensional parameters of the trailer 1 , for instance the length of the drawbar, the width of the trailed implement, etc; the electronic control unit 8 is designed to calculate the amount of reduction of the steering angle or the maximum steering angle based on the introduced parameters).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of FERRARI which teaches changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a size of an implement connected to the work vehicle; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the size of the implement is larger than when the size of the implement is smaller with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling steering of a work vehicle based on sensor-detected operating conditions, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a size of an implement connected to the work vehicle; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the size of the implement is larger than when the size of the implement is smaller and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of LI, CN 110466522 A, hereinafter referred to as LI, respectively.
As to claim 7, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a curvature of the two crop rows; or making the maximum steering angle larger when the curvature is larger than when the curvature is smaller.
However, such matter is taught by LI (see at least paragraph 19 regarding the higher the lane change level, the greater the maximum curvature of the corresponding lane change path, the greater the maximum rate of change of the maximum curvature of the corresponding lane change path, the greater the maximum acceleration, the greater the maximum steering angle, and the greater the rate of change of the maximum steering angle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of LI which teaches changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a curvature of the two crop rows; or making the maximum steering angle larger when the curvature is larger than when the curvature is smaller with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for automatic steering control of a vehicle based on detected information, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a curvature of the two crop rows; or making the maximum steering angle larger when the curvature is larger than when the curvature is smaller and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of Stahl et al., US 2020/0086911 A1, hereinafter referred to as Stahl, respectively.
As to claim 8, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with an angle of a dip of a current location of the work vehicle; or making the maximum steering angle smaller when the angle of the dip is larger than when the angle of the dip is smaller.
However, such matter is taught by Stahl (see at least paragraph 19 regarding the maximum machine steering angle may be limited based on one more various operations conditions such as, but not limited to, machine speed, ground side slope, implement position, stability, obstacle avoidance, lateral acceleration, ground conditions, as well as other conditions known to those skilled in the art. It may be desirable, for example, to reduce the maximum machine steering angle at high machine speeds to prevent the machine from sliding laterally when turning. As another example, when the machine 10 is traveling on a side slope, it may be desirable to reduce the maximum machine steering angle in the uphill direction to prevent the machine 10 from tipping).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Stahl which teaches changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with an angle of a dip of a current location of the work vehicle; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the angle of the dip is larger than when the angle of the dip is smaller with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling steering of a work vehicle based on sensor-detected operating conditions, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with an angle of a dip of a current location of the work vehicle; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the angle of the dip is larger than when the angle of the dip is smaller and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of KOJIMASA et al., KR 20010029583 A, hereinafter referred to as KOJIMASA, respectively.
As to claim 9, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a size of a distance between the two crop rows; or making the maximum steering angle smaller when the distance between the two crop rows is smaller than when the distance between the two crop rows is larger.
However, such matter is taught by KOJIMASA (see at least paragraph 76 regarding the maximum steering angle of the front wheel (1) is set in correspondence with the planting width (number of planting rows), front wheel tread, and wheelbase so that when the front wheel (1) is steered to the maximum extent to turn the aircraft into a U-turn, the center of the aircraft is almost adjacent to the planting state, and accordingly, it is made easy to control the alignment after turning into a U-turn near the rice paddy ridge).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of KOJIMASA which teaches changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a size of a distance between the two crop rows; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the distance between the two crop rows is smaller than when the distance between the two crop rows is larger with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling steering of a work vehicle, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of changing the maximum steering angle in accordance with a size of a distance between the two crop rows; and making the maximum steering angle smaller when the distance between the two crop rows is smaller than when the distance between the two crop rows is larger and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of Auguet et al., US 2008/0177445 A1, hereinafter referred to as Auguet, respectively.
As to claim 11, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured or programmed to set the maximum steering angle in accordance with a wheelbase of the work vehicle.
However, such matter is taught by Auguet (see at least paragraph 39 regarding a second block 412 of the first unit 41 of the controller 4 determines the maximum axle steering angle .beta..sub.max relating to an equivalent bicycle modelling, on the basis of the wheelbase value A of the vehicle and the minimum radius R.sub.min calculated previously).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Auguet which teaches wherein the controller is configured or programmed to set the maximum steering angle in accordance with a wheelbase of the work vehicle with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling a steering angle of one or more vehicle wheels based on detected vehicle information, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of setting the maximum steering angle in accordance with a wheelbase of the work vehicle and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of TAKAO et al., US 2023/0296385 A1, hereinafter referred to as TAKAO, respectively.
As to claim 12, MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach wherein, when determining an impossibility to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path, the controller is configured or programmed to perform a control of halting the work vehicle.
However, such matter is taught by TAKAO (see at least paragraph 4 regarding in the case where an obstacle is located on a route of a mobile body, and, for example, if it is impossible to generate another route that leads to a target position while avoiding the obstacle, the mobile body is kept stopped in front of the obstacle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of TAKAO which teaches wherein, when determining an impossibility to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path, the controller is configured or programmed to perform a control of halting the work vehicle with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling an autonomous vehicle to travel along a route based on sensor-detected environmental information, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of performing a control of halting the work vehicle when determining an impossibility to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINAISHI et al., JP 2004008186 A, hereinafter referred to as MINAISHI, in view of IWAMI et al., WO 2017208306 A1, hereinafter referred to as IWAMI, in view of Sakaguchi et al., US 2020/0359549 A1, hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi, and further in view of Amano, US 2024/0402726 A1, hereinafter referred to as Amano, respectively.
As to claim 13, MINAISHI does not explicitly teach changing the maximum steering angle based on the reduced traveling speed.
However, such matter is taught by IWAMI (see at least paragraphs 25-29 regarding the steering upper limit setting unit 760 is incorporated in the target steering calculation unit 76, and the steering upper limit setting unit 760 calculates the steering upper limit by using the first steering value, the second steering value, and the target steering For the value, it has the function to clamp its upper limit, that is, the upper limiter function. It is preferable that this upper limit value also varies with the vehicle speed. That is, by setting the maximum target steering value to be output as the vehicle speed increases, steering stability at high speed driving is improved).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of IWAMI which teaches changing the maximum steering angle based on the reduced traveling speed with the system of MINAISHI as both systems are directed to a system and method for autonomous guidance and steering control of a work vehicle based on sensor data, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of changing the maximum steering angle based on the reduced traveling speed and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI.
MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI, does not explicitly teach determining the target steering angle based on the changed maximum steering angle.
However, such matter is taught by Sakaguchi (see at least paragraphs 65-70 regarding the steering amount calculator 41 calculates a steering amount for correcting locational shifting and directional shifting based on the locational shifting calculated by the locational shifting amount calculator 57 and the directional shifting calculated by the directional shifting amount calculator 58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Sakaguchi which teaches determining the target steering angle based on the changed maximum steering angle with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI, as both systems are directed to a system and method for autonomous guidance and steering control of a work vehicle based on sensor data, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of determining the target steering angle based on the changed maximum steering angle and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI.
MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, does not explicitly teach when determining an impossibility to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path, performing a control of making the traveling speed of the work vehicle smaller than a current traveling speed.
However, such matter is taught by Amano (see at least paragraph 61 regarding the obstacle sensor 76 detects an obstacle in front in a course of the unmanned vehicle 2. The obstacle sensor 76 can detect an obstacle disposed in a detection range 10 of the obstacle sensor 76. The detection range 10 is specified so as to include the travel path 15 in front in the course of the unmanned vehicle 2. The control device 30 controls the travel device 51 so that the unmanned vehicle 2 decelerates or stops at the time when it is determined that an obstacle is located on the travel path 15 in front in the course of the unmanned vehicle 2 based on detection data from the obstacle sensor 76).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Amano which teaches when determining an impossibility to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path, performing a control of making the traveling speed of the work vehicle smaller than a current traveling speed with the system of MINAISHI, as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi, as both systems are directed to a system and method for controlling autonomous navigation of a vehicle based on sensor-detected environmental information, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility of when determining an impossibility to cause the work vehicle to follow the target path, performing a control of making the traveling speed of the work vehicle smaller than a current traveling speed and would have predictably applied it to improve the system of MINAISHI as modified by IWAMI and Sakaguchi.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Stanhope (US 20190059199 A1) regarding a system for determining a location of a center line of a first strip of a plurality of strips of the field.
Ellaboudy et al. (US 20210000006 A1) regarding a system for determining, based on the position data for the crop row, a yaw and a lateral position of the vehicle with respect to a lane bounded by the crop row.
Bergerman et al. (Robot Farmers: Autonomous Orchard Vehicles Help Tree Fruit Production) regarding a system for perception and navigation systems for a family of autonomous orchard vehicles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE S. PARK whose telephone number is (571)272-3151. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00AM-5:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anne M ANTONUCCI can be reached at (313)446-6519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.S.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights