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 .
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.
Claim(s) 21-37, 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Shearer et al (US Patent No. 10,918,008).
Regarding claim 21, Shearer teaches An agricultural system comprising:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions executable by the one or more processors (102 figure 3) that, when
executed by the one or more processors, configure the one or more processors to:
obtain soil measure values for different locations across a worksite, each soil measure value indicative of an ability of soil at the corresponding location to bear a load; (202-204 figure 7 column 9 line 15-20 column 6 line 45-60)
obtain one or more load varying characteristics corresponding to a work machine, the one or more load varying characteristics indicative of variance of a load of the work machine over time; and (column 7 line 45-55 modify the operation of tillage implement to minimize yield loss column 8 line 5-60)
control one or more controllable subsystems of the work machine during a current operation based on the soil measure values and the one or more load varying characteristics. (210 figure 7 adjust tillage parameter to working map column 9 line 15-20 column 8 line 5-10 adjust shanks).
Regarding claim 22, Shearer teaches wherein the one or more load varying characteristics include one or more operating parameters of the work machine. (column 8 line 5-60 column 8 line 20-25 adjust supply fluid 56 to adjust penetration depth down force)
Regarding claim 23, Shearer teaches wherein the one or more machine operating parameters include one or more of a travel speed of the work machine and a rate at which the work machine will apply a material to the worksite.(column 8 line 50-55 increase ground speed of work vehicle)
Regarding claim 24, Shearer teaches wherein the one or more load varying characteristic include one or more plant characteristics of plants at the worksite. (column 8 line 5-20 soil compaction level is monitored and shanks 46 are adjusted according to the soil compaction level (plant characteristic)).
Regarding claim 25, Shearer teaches wherein the plants comprise crops and wherein the one or more plant characteristics include one or more of crop yield, crop moisture, and crop hybrid. (column 8 line 5-15 soil compaction is related to crop yield column 7 line 1-10 yield loss)
Regarding claim 26, Shearer teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
obtain one or more machine characteristics corresponding to the work machine; and (200 figure 7)
control one or more controllable subsystems of the agricultural work machine based on the soil measure values, the one or more load varying characteristics, and the one or more machine characteristics. (column 8 line 5-60 machine characteristic is shank pressure 46 and controlling 46 based on soil compaction levels).
Regarding claim 27, Shearer teaches wherein the one or more machine characteristics comprises one or more of a dimension of the work machine, a weight of the work machine, a model of the work machine, a characteristic of a ground engaging traction element of the work machine, and a number of axels of the work machine. (column 6 line 20-30 weight of work vehicle).
Regarding claim 28, Shearer teaches wherein the one or more controllable subsystems comprise one or more of a load redistribution subsystem, a traction control subsystem, a tire inflation subsystem, a navigation subsystem, and a machine settings subsystem. (column 8 line 40-60 adjust engine speed transmission ground speed).
Regarding claim 29, Shearer teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
generate a route for the work machine to traverse the worksite based on the soil measure values and the one or more load varying characteristics; and (208 figure 7, figure 6)
control, as the one or more controllable subsystems, a navigation subsystem to cause the work machine to travel the route. (210 figure 7)
Regarding claim 30, Shearer teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
obtain the soil measure values by predicting the soil measure values based on one or more characteristics of the worksite. (204 figure 7).
Regarding claim 31, Shearer teaches wherein the one or more characteristics of the worksite comprise one or more of elevation, slope, soil type, and soil moisture.(204 figure 7 column 7 line 1-25).
Regarding claim 32, Shearer teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
obtain the soil measure values by obtaining measured values generated during a prior operation at the worksite, the prior operation prior to the current operation. (202-208 figure 7).
Regarding claim 33, Shearer teaches wherein the measured values include downforce margin values. (column 7 line 1-20).
Regarding claim 34, Shearer teaches wherein the measured values include cone index values. (column 7 line 1-20).
Regarding claim 35, Shearer teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
generate a fill strategy for the work machine based on the soil measure values and the one or more load varying characteristics; and
control, the one or more controllable subsystems based on the fill strategy. (210 figure 7)
Regarding claim 36, Shearer teaches wherein the fill strategy instructs one or more of a fill level limit, how the work machine is emptied, and how the work machine is filled. (210 figure 7)
Regarding claim 37, see the rejection to claim 21 and the limitations are substantially similar.
Regarding claim 40, Shearer teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further configure the one or more processors to:
generate a route for the work machine to traverse the worksite based on the predicted soil measure values; and
control the one or more controllable subsystems to cause the work machine to travel the route. (208-210 figure 7)
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) 38-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shearer et al (US Patent No. 10,918,008) in view of Hale et al (US Patent No. 5,902,343)
Regarding claim 38, Shearer teaches An agricultural system comprising:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions executable by the one or more processors that, when executed by the one or more processors, configure the one or more processors to:
obtain data corresponding to the worksite, the data including:
soil type values for different locations across a worksite, each soil type value indicative of a soil type at the corresponding location; (202 figure 7)
soil moisture values for the different locations across the worksite, each soil moisture value indicative of a moisture of the soil at the corresponding location; (206 soil compaction includes moisture content see 103 Hale below)
predict soil measure values for the different locations across the worksite based on the soil type values, the terrain values, and the soil moisture values, each soil measure value indicative of an ability of soil at the corresponding location to bear a load; and (208 figure 7)
control one or more controllable subsystems of an agricultural work machine based on the predicted soil measure values. (210 figure 7)
Shearer does not explicitly teach however Hale teaches terrain values for the different locations across the worksite, each terrain value indicative of a terrain characteristic at the corresponding location; and (figure 2 and abstract altitude and moisture content).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Shearer based on the teachings of Hale to teach terrain values for the different locations across the worksite, each terrain value indicative of a terrain characteristic at the corresponding location. The motivation would be to sample field and generate image and map (abstract figure 2).
Regarding claim 39, Shearer teaches wherein the data comprises one or more of a map of the worksite, sensor data corresponding to the worksite, weather data corresponding to the worksite, and drainage data corresponding to the worksite. (208 figure 7 see figure 4-6)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C. JIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9898. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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.
/GEORGE C JIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
