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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on November 14th 2025. These drawings are accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 14th 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 on December 2nd 2025.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware of, in the specification.
Status of Claims
This Non-Final rejection is in response to the applicant’s filing on November 14th 2025;
Claims 1-16 are pending and examined below.
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.
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 limitations use 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 limitations are: “…a controller configured to control…”, “…switches configured to input …”, “…switch configured to set…” and “…controller …configured to control…” in claim 1 (and those claims that depend therefrom).
Because this claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Specifically, the control unit and selector are described in the specification as an electronic control unit (ECU) [paragraph 0035 and 0041].
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations 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 § 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.
1. Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii (Patent No. JP2001010362A) in view of Carlsson (Patent No. US20110282519A1).
Regarding claim 1 Ishii teaches, an agricultural work vehicle, comprising; (See Ishii paragraph 0011; “…described below for an agricultural tractor (hereinafter, tractor 10) which is a work vehicle. As shown in FIG. 1…”); a transmission configured to be electronically controlled; (See Ishii paragraph 0017; “…an agricultural tractor (hereinafter, tractor 10) which is a work vehicle. As shown in FIG. 1…”); and provided to vary speed of the work vehicle; ( See Ishii paragraph 0020; “transmission 13 includes two double-acting hydraulic cylinders (hereinafter referred to as "3-4 speed" shift hydraulic cylinders 53 and "1-2 speed" shift hydraulic cylinders 54) which serve as shift actuators.”); a controller configured to control the transmission; (See Ishii paragraph 0026; “…the output of the traveling controller 8b… reverse clutches 4F and 4R and the two cylinders 53 and 54 of the main transmission 13 are extended and contracted…”); main manipulation parts provided in a region, in which a driver's seat is present, to input commands to drive the work vehicle to the controller; (See Ishii paragraph 0015; “…Various setting devices such as a turning control switch 30 and a rolling control ON/OFF switch 31 are provided near these lever guides, and these setting signals are transmitted to the controller 8 which is a control means below the pilot seat 17…”).
Ishii does not explicitly teach but Carlsson teaches, external switches configured to input commands to move the work vehicle forward or rearward from an outside independently of the main manipulation parts; (See Carlsson Paragraph 0020; “…in FIG. 4, the control members or in this case buttons of the control sticks being shown on the outside thereof. The four main directions of the control stick are furthermore shown between the control sticks. If a control stick is used, it is shown in grey, i.e. shaded, and its direction of rotation is also shown in grey/shaded. In the top example, only the left control stick 12 is shaded, as is an arrow pointing to the left. The example thus shows that when the left control stick 12 is moved to the left, the right caterpillar track is driven forwards and the left track is driven backwards. The small figures on the right show that the two caterpillar tracks 6 are active as they are shaded/grey, resulting in the dark arrow showing that the machine turns to the left. The next row shows what happens when the left control stick 12 is moved straight to the right (shaded right arrow). The right track is then driven backwards and the left track is driven forwards and the machine turns to the right on the spot. The fourth row in FIG. 4 shows that the left control stick is moved forwards, as a result of which both caterpillar tracks drive forwards and the machine goes straight forwards.”); and a mode switch configured to set external manipulation mode in which the external switches can be manipulated; wherein the external switches comprise: a forward switch configured to input a forward command to move the work vehicle forward; and a reverse switch configured to input a reverse command to move the work vehicle rearward; (See Carlsson paragraph 0020; “…The example thus shows that when the left control stick 12 is moved to the left, the right caterpillar track is driven forwards and the left track is driven backwards. The small figures on the right show that the two caterpillar tracks 6 are active as they are shaded/grey, resulting in the dark arrow showing that the machine turns to the left. The next row shows what happens when the left control stick 12 is moved straight to the right (shaded right arrow). The right track is then driven backwards and the left track is driven forwards and the machine turns to the right on the spot. The fourth row in FIG. 4 shows that the left control stick is moved forwards, as a result of which both caterpillar tracks drive forwards and the machine goes straight forwards. Immediately below, it is shown that the left control stick is moved backwards so that both caterpillar tracks drive the machine straight backwards. If the control stick is moved in a diagonal direction, the aforementioned movements are combined so that the machine both turns and goes in a diagonal direction backwards or forwards. This means that the operator can control travel in the desired direction using only one control stick, in this case the left control stick 12…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Carlson into the invention of Ishii to include control system for a remote control work machine as Carlson discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a remote control of work machine as disclosed by Ishii and outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle as taught by Carlson. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 2 Ishii in view of Carlsson teaches, the agricultural work vehicle of claim 1,Ishii also teaches, further comprising a sensitivity switch configured to adjust sensitivity of a control signal from the controller; (See Ishii paragraph 0015; ” Various setting devices such as a turning control switch 30 and a rolling control ON/OFF switch 31 are provided near these lever guides, and these setting signals are transmitted to the controller 8 which is a control means …”); wherein, when a forward command is input by manipulating the forward switch or a reverse command is input by manipulating the reverse switch; (See Ishii paragraph 0013; “…when the forward/reverse switching lever 22 is operated forward, the forward limit switch 23F is turned on, and the forward clutch 4F is turned on via the energization command of the controller 8 to enable the vehicle to move forward. On the other hand, when the forward/reverse switching lever 22 is operated backward, the reverse limit switch 23R is turned on, and the reverse clutch 4R is turned on via the energization command of the controller 8 to bring the vehicle into the reverse state…”); a current value of the control signal from the controller reaches a determination value, determined by a target vehicle speed, with a gradient set by the sensitivity switch; (See Ishii paragraph 0021-0022; “The rotational power transmitted from the main transmission 13 is transmitted to the rear wheel differential mechanism 50. Further, a gear shift position sensor, which is a means for detecting the vehicle speed of the tractor, is provided at the rotation base of the gear shift lever 27, and is configured to detect the "LL speed" here.
As a result, the tractor 10 shifts from the first speed (main speed "1st speed", sub speed "LL speed") to the 16th speed (main speed "4th speed", sub speed "H speed")…”).
Regarding claim 4 Ishii in view of Carlsson teaches, the agricultural work vehicle of claim 1, Ishii also teaches, wherein the controller controls the speed of the work vehicle to 0 km/h when manipulation of the forward switch or the reverse switch is released; (See Ishii paragraph 0036; “Communication is performed to switch the main shift position 13 to the lowest speed (first speed) (STEP 4), and the output of the rear wheel single-brake during turning is stopped (STEPs 5 and 6). As a result, it is possible to quickly prevent the tilted state of the tractor 10 from further increasing. Then, to prevent dashing of the vehicle, the solenoid 62b of the switching control valve is energized to stop the rotation of the PTO shaft 33 (STEP 7), and the working machine rolling state is changed to the horizontal state (STEP 8). After that, the working machine 5 is landed downward (STEP 9).”).
Regarding claim 5 Ishii in view of Carlsson teaches, the agricultural work vehicle of claim 1,Ishii also teaches, further comprising an electronic brake configured to be electronically controlled; wherein the controller releases engagement of the electronic brake only during a time interval in which the work vehicle is to be moved forward or backward by manipulation of the external switches; (See Ishii paragraph 0026; “At the input portion of the traveling controller 8b, limit switches 23F and 23R of the forward/reverse switching lever 22, shift up/down switches 29A and 29B, a shift position sensor 32, a turning control switch 30, a steering angle sensor 17 are provided. Etc. are connected and provided. At the output of the traveling controller 8b, the solenoids 63F and 63R of the switching control valve that pressure-operate the forward and reverse clutches 4F and 4R and the two cylinders 53 and 54 of the main transmission 13 are extended and contracted. The solenoids 64a, 64b, 64c, 64d of the switching control valve and the solenoids 65 (65) of the proportional pressure control valves for sending pressure oil to the hydraulic cylinders 56 (56) for the brakes of the rear wheels 2R are connected.”).
Claims 3 and 6-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii (Patent No. JP2001010362A) in view of Carlsson (Patent No. US20110282519A1) and Matsuzaki (Patent No. US9708793B2).
Regarding claim 3 Ishii in view of Carlsson teaches, the agricultural work vehicle of claim 1, Ishii does not explicitly teach but Matsuzaki teaches, wherein the external switches further comprise a neutral switch configured to control the speed of the work vehicle to 0 km/h; (See Matsuzaki column 17, line 30-36; “When changing from this manual running state to the automatic running state, the driver stops work running of the vehicle. Further, the first control unit 61 presumes a change to automatic running based on conditions of input of a detection signals that indicate detection of a neutral state of a forward/backward operation tool (shuttle operation tool), detection of an OFF state of a PTO driving operation tool…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Carlson into the invention of Ishii to include control system for a remote control work machine as Carlson discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a remote control of work machine as disclosed by Ishii and outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle as taught by Carlson. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding Claim 6 Ishi teaches a method of controlling an agricultural work vehicle; (See Ishii paragraph 0011; “…described below for an agricultural tractor (hereinafter, tractor 10) which is a work vehicle. As shown in FIG. 1…”); the method comprising: a deactivation step in which external manipulation mode is deactivated; (See Ishii paragraph 0030; “…In the "working machine rolling mode", while the first switch 7A is turned on, the solenoid 61a of the switching control valve for raising the working machine rightward is energized, and the piston of the rolling hydraulic cylinder 43 is energized. And the right side of the working machine 5 is raised and the second switch 7B is turned on, the solenoid 61b of the switching control valve for lowering the working machine right is energized, and the piston of the rolling hydraulic cylinder 43 is driven. Is extended and the right side of the working machine 5 is lowered. Further, when both switches 7A, 7A are OFF, it becomes END.”);
wherein, when a mode switch is manipulated into the external manipulation mode by a driver and a first entry condition for entry to the manipulation standby step from the deactivation step and a second entry condition for entry to the activation step from the manipulation standby step are satisfied, the method enters the activation step; (See Ishii paragraph 0021-0022, 0034 and 0036; “The rotational power transmitted from the main transmission 13 is transmitted to the rear wheel differential mechanism 50. Further, a gear shift position sensor, which is a means for detecting the vehicle speed of the tractor, is provided at the rotation base of the gear shift lever 27, and is configured to detect the "LL speed" here.
As a result, the tractor 10 shifts from the first speed (main speed "1st speed", sub speed "LL speed") to the 16th speed (main speed "4th speed", sub speed "H speed")
…as shown in FIG. 9, when the tractor 10 is moved forward or backward, the clutches 4F, 4R are used as means for restraining high-speed traveling except for the low-speed position preset by the detection of the shift position sensor 32.
…the industrial machine elevating controller 8a connected to the vehicle body horizontal sensor 45 first moves to the traveling controller 8b when it approaches an angle at which the tractor 10 may fall, that is, a so-called falling angle. Communication is performed to switch the main shift position 13 to the lowest speed (first speed) (STEP 4), and the output of the rear wheel single-brake during turning is stopped (STEPs 5 and 6). As a result, it is possible to quickly prevent the tilted state of the tractor 10 from further increasing. Then, to prevent dashing of the vehicle, the solenoid 62b of the switching control valve is energized to stop the rotation of the PTO shaft 33 (STEP 7), and the working machine rolling state is changed to the horizontal state (STEP 8). After that, the working machine 5 is landed downward (STEP 9).”).
Ishii does not explicitly teach but Carlsson teaches, an activation step in which the external manipulation mode is activated after the deactivation step, so that the work vehicle can be moved forward or backward by manipulating a forward switch or reverse switch from an outside; (See Carlsson paragraph 0020; “…The example thus shows that when the left control stick 12 is moved to the left, the right caterpillar track is driven forwards and the left track is driven backwards. The small figures on the right show that the two caterpillar tracks 6 are active as they are shaded/grey, resulting in the dark arrow showing that the machine turns to the left. The next row shows what happens when the left control stick 12 is moved straight to the right (shaded right arrow). The right track is then driven backwards and the left track is driven forwards and the machine turns to the right on the spot. The fourth row in FIG. 4 shows that the left control stick is moved forwards, as a result of which both caterpillar tracks drive forwards and the machine goes straight forwards. Immediately below, it is shown that the left control stick is moved backwards so that both caterpillar tracks drive the machine straight backwards. If the control stick is moved in a diagonal direction, the aforementioned movements are combined so that the machine both turns and goes in a diagonal direction backwards or forwards. This means that the operator can control travel in the desired direction using only one control stick, in this case the left control stick 12…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Carlson into the invention of Ishii to include control system for a remote control work machine as Carlson discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a remote control of work machine as disclosed by Ishii and outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle as taught by Carlson. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Ishii does not explicitly teach but Matsuzaki teaches, and a manipulation standby step in which manipulation of the forward switch or reverse switch is waited for before entering the activation step from the deactivation step; (See Matsuzaki column 17, line 30-36; “When changing from this manual running state to the automatic running state, the driver stops work running of the vehicle. Further, the first control unit 61 presumes a change to automatic running based on conditions of input of a detection signals that indicate detection of a neutral state of a forward/backward operation tool (shuttle operation tool), detection of an OFF state of a PTO driving operation tool…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsuzaki into the invention of Ishii to include work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle as Matsuzaki discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a working vehicle as disclosed by Ishii and work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle by Matsuzaki. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 7 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 6, Ishii further teaches, wherein the first entry condition includes a gear is engaged, a parking brake is released, and an engine RPM satisfies a predetermined condition; (See Ishii paragraph 0036; “…controller 8a connected to the vehicle body horizontal sensor 45 first moves to the traveling controller 8b when it approaches an angle at which the tractor 10 may fall, that is, a so-called falling angle. Communication is performed to switch the main shift position 13 to the lowest speed (first speed) (STEP 4), and the output of the rear wheel single-brake during turning is stopped (STEPs 5 and 6). As a result, it is possible to quickly prevent the tilted state of the tractor 10 from further increasing. Then, to prevent dashing of the vehicle, the solenoid 62b of the switching control valve is energized to stop the rotation of the PTO shaft 33 (STEP 7), and the working machine rolling state is changed to the horizontal state (STEP 8). After that, the working machine 5 is landed downward (STEP 9).”).
Regarding claim 8 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 6, Ishii further teaches, wherein, when the first and second entry conditions are satisfied in a state in which a standby maintenance condition for maintenance of the manipulation standby step has been satisfied, the method enters the activation step; (See Ishii paragraph 0036; “…controller 8a connected to the vehicle body horizontal sensor 45 first moves to the traveling controller 8b when it approaches an angle at which the tractor 10 may fall, that is, a so-called falling angle. Communication is performed to switch the main shift position 13 to the lowest speed (first speed) (STEP 4), and the output of the rear wheel single-brake during turning is stopped (STEPs 5 and 6). As a result, it is possible to quickly prevent the tilted state of the tractor 10 from further increasing. Then, to prevent dashing of the vehicle, the solenoid 62b of the switching control valve is energized to stop the rotation of the PTO shaft 33 (STEP 7), and the working machine rolling state is changed to the horizontal state (STEP 8). After that, the working machine 5 is landed downward (STEP 9).”).
Regarding claim 9 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 8, Ishii does not explicitly teach but Matsuzaki teaches, wherein the standby maintenance condition is a vehicle speed is 0 km/h; (See Matsuzaki column 17, line 30-36; “When changing from this manual running state to the automatic running state, the driver stops work running of the vehicle. Further, the first control unit 61 presumes a change to automatic running based on conditions of input of a detection signals that indicate detection of a neutral state of a forward/backward operation tool (shuttle operation tool), detection of an OFF state of a PTO driving operation tool…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsuzaki into the invention of Ishii to include work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle as Matsuzaki discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a working vehicle as disclosed by Ishii and work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle by Matsuzaki. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 10 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 6, Ishii does not explicitly teach but Matsuzaki teaches, wherein the second entry condition includes 'a vehicle speed is maintained at 0 km/h for a predetermined period of time' and 'the first entry condition is maintained continuously; (See Matsuzaki column 13, line 26-27; “In the automatic driving permission mode M2, the tractor maintains a stopped state.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsuzaki into the invention of Ishii to include work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle as Matsuzaki discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a working vehicle as disclosed by Ishii and work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle by Matsuzaki. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 11 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 6, Ishii further teaches, wherein, when the second entry condition is not satisfied, the method enters the deactivation step from the manipulation standby step; (See Ishii paragraph 0030; “…In the "working machine rolling mode", while the first switch 7A is turned on, the solenoid 61a of the switching control valve for raising the working machine rightward is energized, and the piston of the rolling hydraulic cylinder 43 is energized. And the right side of the working machine 5 is raised and the second switch 7B is turned on, the solenoid 61b of the switching control valve for lowering the working machine right is energized, and the piston of the rolling hydraulic cylinder 43 is driven. Is extended and the right side of the working machine 5 is lowered. Further, when both switches 7A, 7A are OFF, it becomes END.”).
Regarding claim 12 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 6, Ishii further teaches, wherein, when a forward command is input by manipulating the forward switch or a reverse command is input by manipulating the reverse switch in the activation step, a current value of a control signal from a controller reaches a determination value, determined by a target vehicle speed, with a set gradient; (See Ishii paragraph 0021-0022; “The rotational power transmitted from the main transmission 13 is transmitted to the rear wheel differential mechanism 50. Further, a gear shift position sensor, which is a means for detecting the vehicle speed of the tractor, is provided at the rotation base of the gear shift lever 27, and is configured to detect the "LL speed" here.
As a result, the tractor 10 shifts from the first speed (main speed "1st speed", sub speed "LL speed") to the 16th speed (main speed "4th speed", sub speed "H speed")…”).
Regarding claim 13 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 12, Ishii further teaches, wherein, when a vehicle speed exceeds a first limit vehicle speed, which is the target vehicle speed, and a second limit vehicle speed, which is set to be higher than the first limit vehicle speed, in the activation step, the work vehicle is stopped; (See Ishii paragraph 0021-0022, 0034 and 0036; “The rotational power transmitted from the main transmission 13 is transmitted to the rear wheel differential mechanism 50. Further, a gear shift position sensor, which is a means for detecting the vehicle speed of the tractor, is provided at the rotation base of the gear shift lever 27, and is configured to detect the "LL speed" here.
As a result, the tractor 10 shifts from the first speed (main speed "1st speed", sub speed "LL speed") to the 16th speed (main speed "4th speed", sub speed "H speed")
…as shown in FIG. 9, when the tractor 10 is moved forward or backward, the clutches 4F, 4R are used as means for restraining high-speed traveling except for the low-speed position preset by the detection of the shift position sensor 32.
…the industrial machine elevating controller 8a connected to the vehicle body horizontal sensor 45 first moves to the traveling controller 8b when it approaches an angle at which the tractor 10 may fall, that is, a so-called falling angle. Communication is performed to switch the main shift position 13 to the lowest speed (first speed) (STEP 4), and the output of the rear wheel single-brake during turning is stopped (STEPs 5 and 6). As a result, it is possible to quickly prevent the tilted state of the tractor 10 from further increasing. Then, to prevent dashing of the vehicle, the solenoid 62b of the switching control valve is energized to stop the rotation of the PTO shaft 33 (STEP 7), and the working machine rolling state is changed to the horizontal state (STEP 8). After that, the working machine 5 is landed downward (STEP 9).”).
Regarding claim 14 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 13, Ishii further teaches, wherein, in an intermediate range higher than the first limit vehicle speed but lower than the second limit vehicle speed, control intended to return the vehicle speed to the first limit vehicle speed is not performed; (See Ishii paragraph 0021-0022, 0034 and 0036; “The rotational power transmitted from the main transmission 13 is transmitted to the rear wheel differential mechanism 50. Further, a gear shift position sensor, which is a means for detecting the vehicle speed of the tractor, is provided at the rotation base of the gear shift lever 27, and is configured to detect the "LL speed" here.
As a result, the tractor 10 shifts from the first speed (main speed "1st speed", sub speed "LL speed") to the 16th speed (main speed "4th speed", sub speed "H speed")
…as shown in FIG. 9, when the tractor 10 is moved forward or backward, the clutches 4F, 4R are used as means for restraining high-speed traveling except for the low-speed position preset by the detection of the shift position sensor 32.
…the industrial machine elevating controller 8a connected to the vehicle body horizontal sensor 45 first moves to the traveling controller 8b when it approaches an angle at which the tractor 10 may fall, that is, a so-called falling angle. Communication is performed to switch the main shift position 13 to the lowest speed (first speed) (STEP 4), and the output of the rear wheel single-brake during turning is stopped (STEPs 5 and 6). As a result, it is possible to quickly prevent the tilted state of the tractor 10 from further increasing. Then, to prevent dashing of the vehicle, the solenoid 62b of the switching control valve is energized to stop the rotation of the PTO shaft 33 (STEP 7), and the working machine rolling state is changed to the horizontal state (STEP 8). After that, the working machine 5 is landed downward (STEP 9).”).
Regarding claim 15 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 6, Ishii does not explicitly teach but Matsuzaki teaches, wherein, when a neutral switch is manipulated by the driver in the activation step, a vehicle speed is returned to 0 km/h; (See Matsuzaki column 17, line 30-36; “When changing from this manual running state to the automatic running state, the driver stops work running of the vehicle. Further, the first control unit 61 presumes a change to automatic running based on conditions of input of a detection signals that indicate detection of a neutral state of a forward/backward operation tool (shuttle operation tool), detection of an OFF state of a PTO driving operation tool…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsuzaki into the invention of Ishii to include work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle as Matsuzaki discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a working vehicle as disclosed by Ishii and work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle by Matsuzaki. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 16 Ishii in view of Carlsson and Matsuzaki teaches, the method of claim 6, Ishii does not explicitly teach but Matsuzaki teaches, wherein, when the work vehicle is equipped with an electronic brake, the first and second entry conditions include 'engagement of a brake is maintained; (See Matsuzaki column 13, line 26-27 and column 13, line 63-67; “In the automatic driving permission mode M2, the tractor maintains a stopped state… In the manual driving constraining mode M5, the tractor stops running and control of a work apparatus that includes a raising/lowering mechanism, and sets a brake mechanism to ON. Setting of engine speed based on an accelerator operation tool”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsuzaki into the invention of Ishii to include work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle as Matsuzaki discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system for outside-control mode for agricultural work vehicle. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of control system for a working vehicle as disclosed by Ishii and work vehicle and running control apparatus of work vehicle by Matsuzaki. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIDIA KWIATKOWSKA whose telephone number is (571)272-5161. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/L.K./ Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
