DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-20 are pending examination.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection is applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument and amendments presented dated 07/02/2026.
The applicant simply states “Applicant respectfully disagrees with the rejection noting that the pending claims are patentably distinguishable over the cited references. However, without acquiescing to the merits of the rejection and in the spirit of advancing prosecution, Applicant has amended the claims to further highlight distinguishing aspects over the citations of the cited art.” The amendments have trigger new grounds of rejection: Ritland in view of Nash for the independent claims 1 and 11. Nash teaches the chemical composition data of soil and desired ground saturation data in (Para [0013 and [0015]).
The examiner believes he has responded to all the arguments presented by the applicant at this time. However, if the applicant believes that the examiner has missed any arguments to respond, the applicant is invited to call the examiner directly to expedite the process.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4 and 11-14 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritland et al. (US20230189692A1) in view of Nash (US 20220408666A1) and herein will be referred as Ritland and Nash respectively.
Regarding Claim 1, Ritland teaches a planting machine (Para [0042]: “The row unit 200 may be any row unit configured to deposit seeds in the ground (e.g., by first forming seed furrow). In the illustrated embodiment, the row unit 200 includes a subframe 210 which may be mounted to a transversely-extending planter toolbar (not shown) such as by a set of parallel arms (not shown). The toolbar draws the planter along the travel direction T generally indicated in FIG. 1”) comprising:
a processing system (Para [0053] #500 Line 1-6: “One example of an embodiment of a planter control system 1500 including control system 500 is schematically illustrated in FIG. 15. A controller 1514 (e.g., having a processor, memory, and/or graphical user interface) is optionally in data communication with an implement data bus 1502 (e.g., CAN bus). A gateway 1510 is also optionally in communication with the bus 1502; the gateway 1510 optionally communicates (e.g., wirelessly) with a monitor 1512 which may comprise monitoring software operating on a consumer computing device (e.g., tablet, smartphone, etc.). The monitor 1512 and controller 1514 are optionally disposed in a cab of a tractor)”;
a moisture measurement device in communication with the processing system (Para [0071] : “At step 1610, the system optionally takes one or more agronomic measurements in or adjacent to the seed furrow (e.g., measures residue presence or amount such as by using a camera, reflectivity sensor, optical sensor or other sensor; detects soil temperature; measures soil moisture; detects seed presence such as by using a camera, reflectivity sensor, optical sensor or other sensor; measures soil color; detects organic matter; detects seed color; detects seed orientation; etc.). ”;
a seed delivery system in communication with the processing system (Para [0044]: “A seed delivery member, such as a seed tube 240 or other seed conduit or seed conveyor, is optionally supported on the subframe 210 to deliver seeds from another seed delivery member, such as a meter (not shown) such as a pneumatic seed meter, to the seed furrow. In some embodiments, a seed delivery member, such as a seed conveyor 262 such as a seed belt (see FIG. 7) or seed brush, is incorporated in the row unit instead of a seed tube 240.”);
a material dispersion system in communication with the processing system (Para [0071]: “At step 1630, the system optionally determines one or more actuations (e.g., appropriate actuation, desired actuation, recommended actuation, etc.) based at least in part on the one or more agronomic measurements made at step 1610”),
wherein the processing system is configured to: receive one or more soil moisture measurement signals from the soil moisture measurement device; determine one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on a moisture measurement signal (Para [0072]: “In various embodiments of the method 1600, the system performs one or more of the following actions: detects an amount of residue and adjusts a row cleaner setting (e.g., down pressure, position, angle, aggressiveness, etc.) based on the amount of residue; detects an amount of residue and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the amount of residue; detects a soil moisture and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the soil moisture level;”);
and transmit a control signal to one or more of the seed delivery system and the material dispersion system to disburse a desired amount of material with a commodity based at least in part on the determined material dispersion parameters (Para [0071]: “At step 1630, the system optionally determines one or more actuations (e.g., appropriate actuation, desired actuation, recommended actuation, etc.) based at least in part on the one or more agronomic measurements made at step 1610. For example, the system may carry out one or more of the following actuations: controlling one or more liquid application valves (e.g., for application of any one or more of the following or a mixture thereof: water, fertilizer, biological, insecticide, fungicide, etc.) such as closing, opening or modifying an application rate of the one or more valves or modifying a product mixture to be applied by the valves; retracting, extending, or modifying a setting (e.g., downpressure, position, angle, aggressiveness, etc.) of a row cleaner, closing wheel, row unit downforce cylinder, or other actuator; controlling a seed metering criteria (e.g., modifying a seeding rate, seed type, etc.).”).
Ritland may not expressly teach receive chemical composition data of soil and a desired ground saturation for the soil having the chemical composition; determine one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on the chemical composition data, and the desired ground saturation.
Nash teaches receive chemical composition data of soil (Para [0013] : “ A desired chemical/nutrient composition of the targeted soil area is then established in block 24 based at least in part on the nutrient requirements of the vegetation to be grown (block 26).”) and a desired ground saturation for the soil having the chemical composition (Para [0013] : “The chemical composition of the soil, the requirements of the vegetation to be grown and a selected or desired optimum chemical/nutrient composition of the soil along with the measured chemical composition of the by-product water (block 20) is then used to define how a batch of the by-product water should be processed to remove, add or modify its chemical composition to achieve the desired chemical/nutrient composition for the soil (block 28) when the processed by product water is applied to the targeted soil area”); determine one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on a moisture measurement signal, the chemical composition data, and the desired ground saturation (Para [0015] : “ Once the chemical makeup of the soil is known, a selected chemical make-up for the processed by-product water to be applied to the targeted soil can be selected to adjust the chemical makeup of the soil to be closer to an ideal makeup for the vegetation to be grown. Referring to the previous example, if the soil needs more-or-less nitrogen for ideal growing conditions, the processing of the by-product water will be adjusted to increase or decrease the nitrogen to provide more or less nitrogen to the soil. With an ideal water makeup in mind, the batched water is tested (block 20) to see how close it comes to this ideal. The processing plan (block 28) is then created based on comparing what the by-product water is currently to approximately what is needed for the area of soil (with its current chemical/nutrient composition and the needs of the vegetation to be grown) to more closely align with the defined or desired post-application moisture and chemical composition”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ritland to incorporate the teachings of Nash to include receive chemical composition data of soil and a desired ground saturation for the soil having the chemical composition; determine one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on the chemical composition data, and the desired ground saturation. Doing so would optimize the vegetation growth as disclosed in Nash.
Regarding Claim 2, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the planting machine of claim 1.
Ritland also teaches wherein the one or more material dispersion parameters includes whether to disperse the material onto the commodity or adjacent the commodity (Para [0060]: “In operation, in some embodiments, the controller 510 receives seed position information from seed sensor 242 and/or seed sensor 520 and determines a valve command in order to obtain a predetermined liquid placement relative to one or more seeds (e.g., placement on the seed, placement near the seed, etc.).”).
Regarding Claim 3, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the planting machine of claim 1.
Ritland also teaches wherein the one or more material dispersion parameters includes an amount of material to disburse (Para [0072] : “In various embodiments of the method 1600, the system performs one or more of the following actions: detects an amount of residue and adjusts a row cleaner setting (e.g., downpressure, position, angle, aggressiveness, etc.) based on the amount of residue; detects an amount of residue and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the amount of residue; detects a soil moisture and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the soil moisture level; detects one or more seeds and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the seed position or spacing; detects a soil color and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the soil color; detects an organic matter level and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the organic matter level; detects a seed color and adjusts a liquid application valve setting (e.g., by identifying based on the seed color that a seed is a refuge seed and applying a different liquid prescription, such as a rate or mixture, to the refuge seed than to a non-refuge seed); detects a seed orientation (e.g., aligned with the trench or normal to the trench, etc.) and adjusts a liquid application valve setting. It should be appreciated that in various embodiments, any measurement disclosed herein may be used to adjust any criterion or setting described herein based on the measurement or information derived from the measurement.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the planting machine of claim 1.
Ritland also teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to receive soil-type data, and wherein the one or more material dispersion parameters is based at least in part on the soil-type data (Para [0072]: “detects a soil color and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the soil color; detects an organic matter level and adjusts a liquid application valve setting based on the organic matter level;”).
Regarding Claim 11, Ritland teaches a method of controlling a planting machine comprising: receiving one or more soil moisture measurement signals from the soil moisture measurement device; determining one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on one or more of the moisture measurement signals (Para [0071] : “Referring to FIG. 16 , an embodiment of a method 1600 for monitoring agronomic measurements and/or controlling or actuating components of an implement (e.g., planter row unit) is illustrated. ”);
and transmitting a control signal to the material dispersion system to disburse a desired amount of material with the commodity based at least in part on the determined amount of material (Para [0071]: “At step 1630, the system optionally determines one or more actuations (e.g., appropriate actuation, desired actuation, recommended actuation, etc.) based at least in part on the one or more agronomic measurements made at step 1610. For example, the system may carry out one or more of the following actuations: controlling one or more liquid application valves (e.g., for application of any one or more of the following or a mixture thereof: water, fertilizer, biological, insecticide, fungicide, etc.) such as closing, opening or modifying an application rate of the one or more valves or modifying a product mixture to be applied by the valves; retracting, extending, or modifying a setting (e.g., downpressure, position, angle, aggressiveness, etc.) of a row cleaner, closing wheel, row unit downforce cylinder, or other actuator; controlling a seed metering criteria (e.g., modifying a seeding rate, seed type, etc.).”).
Nash teaches receive chemical composition data of soil (Para [0013] : “ A desired chemical/nutrient composition of the targeted soil area is then established in block 24 based at least in part on the nutrient requirements of the vegetation to be grown (block 26).”) and a desired ground saturation for the soil having the chemical composition (Para [0013] : “The chemical composition of the soil, the requirements of the vegetation to be grown and a selected or desired optimum chemical/nutrient composition of the soil along with the measured chemical composition of the by-product water (block 20) is then used to define how a batch of the by-product water should be processed to remove, add or modify its chemical composition to achieve the desired chemical/nutrient composition for the soil (block 28) when the processed by product water is applied to the targeted soil area”); determine one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on a moisture measurement signal, the chemical composition data, and the desired ground saturation (Para [0015] : “ Once the chemical makeup of the soil is known, a selected chemical make-up for the processed by-product water to be applied to the targeted soil can be selected to adjust the chemical makeup of the soil to be closer to an ideal makeup for the vegetation to be grown. Referring to the previous example, if the soil needs more-or-less nitrogen for ideal growing conditions, the processing of the by-product water will be adjusted to increase or decrease the nitrogen to provide more or less nitrogen to the soil. With an ideal water makeup in mind, the batched water is tested (block 20) to see how close it comes to this ideal. The processing plan (block 28) is then created based on comparing what the by-product water is currently to approximately what is needed for the area of soil (with its current chemical/nutrient composition and the needs of the vegetation to be grown) to more closely align with the defined or desired post-application moisture and chemical composition”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ritland to incorporate the teachings of Nash to include receive chemical composition data of soil and a desired ground saturation for the soil having the chemical composition; determine one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on the chemical composition data, and the desired ground saturation. Doing so would optimize the vegetation growth as disclosed in Nash.
Regarding Claim 12, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the method of claim 11. Ritland also teaches wherein the one or more material dispersion parameters includes, whether to disburse the material directly onto the commodity or adjacent the commodity (Para [0071] line 19-35).
Regarding Claim 13, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the method of claim 11. Ritland also teaches wherein the one or more material dispersion parameters includes an amount of material to disburse (Para [0072]).
Regarding Claim 14, Ritland teaches the method of claim 11. Ritland also teaches further comprising receiving soil-composition data, and wherein the one or more material dispersion parameters is based at least in part on the soil-type data (Para [0072] Line 11-20).
Claims 5-6, 8, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla et al. (EP4256931A1) and herein after will be referred as Palla.
Regarding Claim 5, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the planting machine of claim 1.
Ritland teaches further comprising determining a position of the planting machine (Para [0057]: “The row data bus 1506 is optionally in communication with a row module 1552 which optionally receives data and/or sends commands to the various row unit components on the row data bus. The row data bus 1506 also optionally receives commands and/or data (e.g., speed, GPS location, commanded planting population, commanded fertilizer rate, etc.) from the implement data bus 1502.”).
Ritland does not expressly teaches determining associated soil parameters; determining soil identification data based at least in part on the position of the planting machine and the associated soil parameters.
Palla teaches determining associated soil parameters; determining soil identification data based at least in part on the position of the planting machine and the associated soil parameters (Para [0034] : “In one example, the present description relates to obtaining a map such as a soil type map. The soil type map includes geolocated values of soil type at the field. Soil type can refer to taxonomic units in soil science, wherein each soil type includes defined sets of shared properties. Soil types can include, for example, sandy soil, clay soil, silt soil, peat soil, chalk soil, loam soil, and various other soil types. Thus, the soil type map provides geolocated values of soil type at different locations in the field of interest which indicate the type of soil at those locations. The soil type map can be generated on the basis of data collected during another operation on the field of interests, for example, previous operations in the same season or in another season. The machines performing the previous operations can have on board sensors that detect characteristics indicative of soil type. Additionally, operating characteristics, machine settings, or machine performance characteristics during previous operations can be indicative of soil type. In other examples, surveys of the field of interest can be performed, either by various machines with sensors such as imaging systems (e.g., an aerial survey) or by humans. For example, samples of the soil at the field of interest can be taken at one or more locations and observed or lab tested to identify the soil type at the different location(s).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ritland and Nash to incorporate the teachings of Palla to include determining associated soil parameters; determining soil identification data based at least in part on the position of the planting machine and the associated soil parameters. Doing so would optimize the planter operation.
Regarding Claim 6, Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla teaches the planting machine of claim 5.
Ritland teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to determine one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on soil-type data (Para [0072] Line 11-20).
Regarding Claim 8, Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla teaches the planting machine of claim 5.
Ritland teaches wherein the moisture measurement device comprises non-contact moisture measurement device (Para [0071]: camera).
Regarding Claim 15, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the method of claim 14.
Palla teaches wherein the soil-composition data comprises pre-measured data (Para [0034]).
Regarding Claim 16, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the planting machine of claim 11.
Ritland teaches further comprising determining a position of the planting machine (Para [0057]); Palla teaches determining associated soil parameters; determining soil identification data based at least in part on the position of the planting machine and the associated soil parameters (Para [0034]).
Regarding Claim 17, Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla teaches method of claim 16.
Ritland also teaches wherein the position of the planting machine is based at least in part on global positioning data (Para [0057]).
Regarding Claim 18, Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla teaches method of claim 16.
Ritland also teaches further comprising determining one or more material dispersion parameters based at least in part on soil identification data (Para [0072] Line 11-20).
Claims 7 and 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla and in further view of Merrill et al. (US12052943B1) and herein after will be referred as Merrill.
Regarding Claim 7, Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla teaches the planting machine of claim 5.
Merrill teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to communicate moisture measurements from the moisture measurement device to a central server (Col.4 Line 20-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ritland and Palla to incorporate the teachings of Merrill to include the processing system is further configured to communicate moisture measurements from the moisture measurement device to a central server. Doing so would optimize the planter operation.
Regarding Claim 19, Ritland in view of Palla teaches the method of claim 16.
Merrill teaches further comprising communicating soil identification data to a central server (Col.4 Line 20-40).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Palla and in further view of Branciforte et al. (US2025/0076249) and herein after will be referred as Branciforte.
Regarding Claim 9, Ritland in view of Palla teaches the planting machine of claim 5.
Branciforte teaches the moisture measurement device comprises an electromagnetic wave-based moisture measurement device (Para [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ritland, and Palla to incorporate the teachings of Branciforte to the moisture measurement device comprises an electromagnetic wave-based moisture measurement device. Doing so would optimize the planter operation.
Regarding Claim 10, Ritland in view of Palla teaches the planting machine of claim 5.
Branciforte teaches the moisture measurement device comprises an insertable moisture measurement device (Para [0025]: “Time domain reflectometry (TDR) sensors determine soil moisture by measuring the propagation time of electromagnetic pulses through the soil. These sensors have two electrodes inserted into the soil, and a pulse of electromagnetic energy is sent between them. The time taken for the pulse to travel reflects the soil's dielectric properties, which correlate with moisture content.”).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritland in view of Nash and in further view of Branciforte.
Regarding Claim 20, Ritland in view of Nash teaches the method of claim 11.
Ritland does not expressly teach wherein the one or more soil moisture measurement signals are based at least in part on electromagnetic wave measurement data.
Branciforte teaches the one or more soil moisture measurement signals are based at least in part on electromagnetic wave measurement data (Para [0025]: “Time domain reflectometry (TDR) sensors determine soil moisture by measuring the propagation time of electromagnetic pulses through the soil. These sensors have two electrodes inserted into the soil, and a pulse of electromagnetic energy is sent between them. The time taken for the pulse to travel reflects the soil's dielectric properties, which correlate with moisture content.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ritland to incorporate the teachings of Branciforte to the moisture measurement device comprises an electromagnetic wave-based moisture measurement device. Doing so would optimize the planter operation.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 ABDHESH K JHA whose telephone number is (571)272-6218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F:0800-1700.
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, James J Lee can be reached at 571-270-5965. 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.
/ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights