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 .
Contents of this rejection:
35 U.S.C. 101 explanation – there is no 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection, just an explanation of why the claims comply with 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim objections
35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections
Prior art rejections
Relevant Prior art
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 101
The present claims are not subject to a 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection because there is no abstract idea. It is completely directed to performing a vehicle action.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Specifically, claim 5 recites that the non-turning back-and-forth travel is selected for the work route in which it is “difficult” to turn. However, difficult is a term of degree and it is unclear what makes something difficult. As such, the Examiner will simply regard the term difficult as any condition.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 12, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: “rote” should be “route”. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-10, and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oasa US20200199850A1, hereinafter “Oasa”.
Regarding claims 1, 12, and 13, Oasa discloses a method, system, and non-transitory computer-readable medium for a work vehicle that causes the work vehicle to automatically travel along a work route (Abstract discloses the controller determines whether the vehicle is in a shuttle motion from the operating position of the forward/reverse travel operating member and the actual traveling direction of the vehicle. The controller determines a target braking force when the vehicle is in the shuttle motion. The controller determines at least one of a target displacement of the travel pump and a target displacement of the travel motor based on the target braking force), the travel control method comprising:
causing the work vehicle to perform a non-turning back-and-forth travel in which after the work vehicle travels from a first end of the work route toward a second end of the work route, the work vehicle reverses a traveling direction without changing an orientation of the work vehicle on the second end side of the work route and travels from the second end of the work route toward the first end of the work route (P5 discloses a shuttle motion for switching the traveling direction during travel is often employed in a work vehicle such as a wheel loader. For example, an operator switches forward/reverse travel lever from the forward travel position to the reverse travel position while the work vehicle is traveling forward. At this time, a controller of the work vehicle switches the discharge direction of the travel pump by switching the pump control valve from the first state P1 to the second state P2. Consequently, the traveling direction of the work vehicle is switched from forward travel to reverse travel).
Regarding claim 2, Oasa discloses wherein the work vehicle performs work on a work target row including a plurality of work objects while autonomously traveling along the work target row (As above, P5 discloses traveling back and forth with a work machine. This is moving back and forth in a row).
Regarding claim 3, Oasa discloses wherein the work vehicle performs work on the work target row while the work vehicle performs the non-turning back-and-forth travel on the work route along the work target row (See again P5).
Regarding claim 6, Oasa discloses designating the travel direction of the work vehicle when the work vehicle exits from the first end side of the work route to a headland area in the non-turning back-and-forth travel (As above, the work vehicle moves in a shuttle motion, so the direction of travel is forward then backward).
Regarding claim 7, Oasa discloses wherein the traveling direction of the work vehicle is fixed to be forward when the work vehicle exits from the first end side of the work route to the headland area in the non-turning back-and-forth travel (Again, while the vehicle is moving forward, the traveling direction is forward).
Regarding claim 8, Oasa discloses wherein the work vehicle performs work only when the work vehicle travels in a specific direction in the non-turning back-and-forth travel (As above, the work vehicle only goes forward and backwards).
Regarding claim 9, Oasa discloses wherein the specific direction is forward (The work vehicle moves forward).
Regarding claim 10, Oasa discloses wherein, in the non-turning back-and-forth travel, the work vehicle performs work on either a forward route in which the work vehicle travels from the first end of the work route toward the second end of the work route or a backward route in which the work vehicle travels from the second end of the work route toward the first end of the work route (This is what shuttle motion is).
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.
Claim(s) 4, 5, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oasa in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claims 4, 5, and 11, Oasa does not explicitly disclose:
(for claim 4) that the work vehicle performs a turning back-and-forth travel and that either the non-turning or turning travel is selected;
(for claim 5) that the non-turning travel is selected when turning is difficult;
(for claim 11) displaying the travel routes
However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well-known in the vehicle arts for a vehicle to make turns and to display travel routes. For example, autonomous vehicles routinely have route displays and pull into a parking spot and then back out of that parking spot because it would be too difficult to make a turn into the parked car next to it.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above-mentioned old and well-known features into the claimed vehicle because of how prominent and pervasive they are in virtually every autonomous vehicle.
Relevant Prior Art
US7686737 directed to a load control structure for a work vehicle comprises: set rotation speed detection device for detecting a set rotation of an engine of the work vehicle; actual rotation speed detection device that senses an actual rotational speed of the engine; continuously variable speed change device that receives power from an engine of the work vehicle; speed change position detecting device for detecting a speed change operation position of the continuously variable speed change device; operating device for speed-shifting the continuously variable speed change device; control device for controlling the operation of the operating device; wherein the control device calculates a drop amount of the actual engine rotation speed from the set rotation speed based on the detected information from the set rotation speed detection device and the actual rotation speed detection device, and sets a limit operation position for the continuously variable speed change device based on the calculated drop amount and a correlation data that correlates the actual engine rotation speeds with operating positions of the continuously variable speed change device, and controls the operating device such that the operating position of the continuously variable speed change device moves to the limit operating position based on the set limit operating position and detected information from the speed change position detecting device, and wherein the control device has command device for commanding a change of the correlation data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARYAN E WEISENFELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 5712721206. 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.
ARYAN E. WEISENFELD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3689
/ARYAN E WEISENFELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights