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 .
Summary
This communication is a First Office Action Non-Final Rejection on the merits.
Claims 21 – 40 are currently pending and considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21, 29 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heim et al. (Hereinafter Heim) (US 9883626 B2).
As per claim 21, Heim teaches the limitations of:
a computer implemented method of controlling a seeding mechanism on a seeding machine, the computer implemented method comprising:
obtaining a seeding motor command signal that defines a control of a seeding motor that drives the seeding mechanism (See at least abstract and column 6 line 56 – column 7 line 13; A rate of change of the sensed variable is determined, and a control signal is generated for controlling an agricultural vehicle, based upon the rate of change in the value of the sensed variable. … Control signal generator component 196 then generates control signals based on the rates of change of the sensed variables over the time period. This is indicated by block 284. By way of example, if the sensed variables are varying at a relatively high rate, this may indicate that the towing vehicle 152 is traveling too fast, and therefore a speed control signal may be generated to control towing vehicle 152 to slow down. On the other hand, if the variables are not varying over time in any significant way, this may indicate that the towing vehicle 152 can go faster, without negatively affecting the performance of planting machine 100. Therefore, the control signal may control towing vehicle 152 to speed up. Generating a towing vehicle speed control signal to control the speed of towing vehicle 152 is indicated by block 286. In another example, control signal generator component 196 generates planting machine control signals 206. These signals are used to control the various controllable subsystems 158 on planting machine 100. This is indicated by block 288. For instance, if most of the sensed variables are not varying rapidly, but the gauge wheel downforce is varying rapidly, then component 196 may determine that it will not slow down towing vehicle 152, but instead it may control downforce actuator 111 on the corresponding row unit 106 to increase the gauge wheel downforce.);
detecting an acceleration value indicative of an acceleration on the seeding machine (See at least column 4 line 2 – 16; Architecture 150 shows a block diagram of one example of planting machine 100 being towed by towing vehicle 152. As described above with respect to FIGS. 1 and 2, planting machine 100 illustratively includes a set of row units 106 and it can include other planting machine functionality 154. Each row unit 106 can include a set of sensors 156, a set of controllable subsystems 158, and other row unit functionality 160, as described above with respect to FIG. 2. The set of sensors 156 can include the acceleration sensor 130, a gauge wheel downforce sensor 162, the seed sensor 117, trench depth sensor 132, closing wheel downforce sensor 134, soil moisture sensor 136, and it can include a wide variety of other sensors 164.);
detecting a wheel based speed value indicative of a wheel speed of a towing vehicle that tows the seeding machine (See at least column 4 line 42 – 46; vehicle 152 can include speed sensor 178, position sensor 180, one or more user interface mechanisms 182, and other towing vehicle functionality 184. Speed sensor 178 illustratively generates a speed signal indicative of the travel speed of towing vehicle 152.);
generating. based on the wheel based speed value and the acceleration value. a seeding mechanism compensation value that represents a compensation of the seeding motor command signal (See at least column 5 line 43 – column 6 line 8; Row unit acceleration 254 can indicate an acceleration vector in x, y and z directions in space. By way of example, the z direction may be generally vertical to the ground surface. The acceleration data in each direction can be weighted. High acceleration values may indicate that row unit 106 is bouncing or otherwise traveling in an uneven fashion over the ground. This may indicate poor or uneven contact with the soil and thus poor planting performance. It thus may indicate that the travel speed of towing vehicle 152 (and thus planting machine 100) should be reduced. Alternatively, the downforce maybe increased. The force exerted on the ground by gauge wheels 122 can also affect the performance of planting machine 100. Therefore, the gauge wheel ground contact force can be determined (e.g., it can be directly sensed or calculated based on the downforce exerted by downforce actuator 111). The rate at which the gauge wheel downforce is varying over time may indicate that the gauge wheel does not have relatively even contact with the ground. If the gauge wheel does not have even contact with the ground, then the profile characteristics of the trench may suffer. This may also provide the basis for controlling the speed of towing vehicle 152. The seed spacing can affect the performance of planting machine 100 as well. Therefore, the rate of change of the seed spacing 258 (which can be calculated using the sensor signal from seed sensor 117 and the vehicle speed) can be used to control towing vehicle 152 or planting machine 100, or both. The trench depth 260 can also affect the performance of planting machine 100. The rate of change of the trench depth over time may indicate that the speed of the towing vehicle 152 should be changed.);
applying the seeding mechanism compensation value to the seeding motor command signal to obtain an adjusted seeding motor command signal (See at least column 5 line 43 – column 6 line 8); and
controlling the seeding motor based on the adjusted seeding motor command signal (See at least column 5 line 43 – column 6 line 8).
Regarding claims 29 and 35:
Claims 29 and 35 are rejected using the same rationale, mutatis mutandis, applied to claim 21 above, respectively.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 22 – 27, 30 – 33 and 36 – 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heim in view of Baurer et al. (Hereinafter Baurer) (US 2020/0329630 A1).
As per claim 22, Heim teaches the limitations of:
prior to generating the seed mechanism compensation value, detecting that the acceleration meets a threshold acceleration value (See at least column 5 line 43 – column 6 line 8), but does not explicitly teach the limitation of:
generating the seeding mechanism compensation value based on a determination that the acceleration on the seeding machine meets the threshold acceleration value.
Baurer teaches limitations of;
generating the seeding mechanism compensation value based on a determination that the acceleration on the seeding machine meets the threshold acceleration value (See at least abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include generating the seeding mechanism compensation value based on a determination that the acceleration on the seeding machine meets the threshold acceleration value as taught by Baurer in the system of Heim, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 23, the combination of Heim and Baurer teaches the limitations of:
wherein the seeding mechanism comprises a seed meter and the seeding motor comprises a meter motor that drives the seed meter (Heim, see at least column 2 line 82 – 52 and Baurer, see at least paragraph 77 – 78).
As per claim 24, the combination of Heim and Baurer teaches the limitations of:
wherein
applying the seeding mechanism compensation value comprises applying the seed mechanism compensation value to a meter motor command signal to obtain an adjusted meter motor command signal (Baurer, see at least paragraph 3 and 45), and
controlling the seeding motor comprises controlling the meter motor based on the adjusted meter motor command signal (Baurer, see at least paragraph 3, 45 and 61 – 62).
As per claim 25, the combination of Heim and Baurer teaches the limitations of:
wherein the seeding mechanism comprises a continuous seed delivery mechanism and the seeding motor comprises a delivery mechanism motor that drives the continuous seed delivery mechanism (Baurer, see at least paragraph 87).
As per claim 26, the combination of Heim and Baurer teaches the limitations of:
wherein applying the seeding mechanism compensation value comprises applying the seed mechanism compensation value to a delivery mechanism motor command signal to obtain an adjusted delivery mechanism motor command signal. and controlling the seeding motor comprises controlling the delivery mechanism motor based on the adjusted delivery mechanism motor command signal (Baurer, see at least paragraph 87 – 91).
As per claim 27, the combination of Heim and Baurer teaches the limitations of:
wherein the seeding machine comprises a row unit and wherein detecting the acceleration value comprises detecting a row unit acceleration value (Baurer, see at least paragraph 45).
Regarding claims 30 – 33 and 36 – 39:
Claims 30 – 33 and 36 – 39 are rejected using the same rationale, mutatis mutandis, applied to claims 22 – 27 above, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 28, 34 and 40 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Czapka et al. (US 2018/0208058 A1) discloses system and method for providing implemented-based speed control for a work vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IG T AN whose telephone number is (571)270-5110. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 10:00AM- 4:00PM.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached at (571) 270-3832. 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.
IG T AN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3662
/IG T AN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights