Wisconsin Patent of the Month – January 2026

Introduction: Defining a New Standard in Industrial Safety

The trajectory of industrial automation is often charted by the patents that resolve fundamental conflicts between operational efficiency and human safety. In the domain of hazardous vegetation management, US Patent No. 12,514,163, titled “Slope mower with safety features,” stands as a pivotal development. Filed on February 21, 2024, and formally issued on January 6, 2026, this intellectual property represents the culmination of intensive research and development by Embankscape Equipment LLC, doing business as RC Mowers. In recognition of its profound contribution to engineering and its immediate potential to save lives in high-risk environments, Swanson Reed has distinguished this invention as the Wisconsin Patent of the Month for January 2026. This accolade is not merely a ceremonial acknowledgement but a validation of the patent’s strategic importance in a state increasingly recognized as a hub for advanced manufacturing and robotics.

The significance of this invention extends beyond the technical specifications of a lawn mower; it addresses a critical intersection of labor economics, liability management, and electromechanical engineering. The invention provides a robust, fail-safe architecture for operating heavy machinery on slopes of up to 50 degrees—terrain that has historically claimed the lives of operators using traditional ride-on equipment. By decoupling the operator from the machine through a sophisticated, two-way communication protocol with integrated safety interlocks, Patent 12,514,163 fundamentally alters the risk profile of vegetation management.

This comprehensive report serves three primary functions. First, it provides an exhaustive technical dissection of the patent, benchmarking its capabilities against global competitors such as Spider and Green Climber to demonstrate its market superiority. Second, it articulates the real-world impact of this technology on the landscaping and municipal services sectors. Third, it utilizes this patent as a primary case study to illustrate the rigorous application of the Four-Part Test under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 41, detailing how Swanson Reed’s proprietary methodologies—including TaxTrex AI and the 6-Eye Review—enable innovative firms to substantiate their R&D tax credit claims with audit-ready precision.

The Socio-Economic and Industrial Context

To fully appreciate the engineering achievements detailed in Patent 12,514,163, one must first understand the severe constraints and hazards inherent in the industrial vegetation management sector. This is an industry characterized by extreme operating environments, where the margin for error is often measured in inches and the consequences of failure are catastrophic.

The Crisis of Slope Stability and Operator Mortality

The fundamental challenge in maintaining levees, roadside embankments, and dam walls is gravity. Standard agricultural equipment is designed for flat or gently rolling terrain. When a traditional ride-on mower attempts to traverse a slope exceeding 15 to 20 degrees, the center of gravity shifts dangerously. The static friction between rubber tires and vegetation—a variable that changes instantaneously with moisture, morning dew, or loose soil—becomes the only force preventing a rollover.

Data from occupational safety regulators consistently highlights “rollover protection system (ROPS) failure” or the absence thereof as a leading cause of fatalities in the landscaping industry. Even with ROPS, the physical trauma of a rollover event, combined with the crushing weight of the machinery and the presence of high-velocity rotating blades, results in severe injury or death. The industry has long sought a solution that removes the human operator from the “crush zone” without sacrificing the precision and control required to maintain complex infrastructure.

The Labor Shortage and Efficiency Imperative

Compounding the safety crisis is an acute labor shortage. The “Green Industry” faces chronic difficulties in recruiting personnel willing to perform hazardous manual labor, such as string trimming (weed whacking) on steep inclines. This manual method is not only grueling and inefficient but also exposes workers to slip-and-fall injuries, poisonous flora, and vector-borne diseases from insects.

In this context, Patent 12,514,163 is not just a safety device; it is a labor multiplier. The technology enables a single operator, standing safely on flat ground, to control a machine that performs the work of a six-person manual crew. This efficiency gain changes the economic viability of vegetation management contracts, allowing municipalities and private contractors to maintain critical infrastructure that might otherwise be neglected due to cost or risk.

Technical Anatomy of Patent 12,514,163

The “Slope mower with safety features” is a sophisticated integration of mechanical engineering, sensor fusion, and wireless communication protocols. Unlike earlier iterations of remote-controlled machinery which simply adapted hobbyist-grade radio controls to hydraulic valves, the system described in Patent 12,514,163 is designed from the ground up as a safety-critical system.

The Two-Way Active Communication Architecture

A defining characteristic of the invention is the implementation of a 1- or 2-way communication architecture. In a typical one-way system, the transmitter blindly sends commands to the receiver. If the receiver misses a packet due to interference—common in urban environments or near power lines—the machine continues its last known vector, potentially leading to a “runaway” scenario.

The Embankscape patent describes a system where the mower is not a passive recipient but an active participant in the control loop. It transmits telemetry data back to the remote control unit (RCU). This “heartbeat” signal creates a continuous digital tether. If the handshake between the RCU and the mower is interrupted for even a fraction of a second, the system’s logic defaults to a safe state, cutting the throttle and engaging the brakes. This bidirectional flow is critical for the implementation of the “visual indicator” features claimed in the patent.

State-Dependent Throttle and Brake Logic

The patent introduces a nuanced control strategy regarding the interplay of throttle and braking. Specifically, the abstract notes the capability for “automatically enabling the mower throttle and maintaining or reducing the throttle based on manipulation of a joystick”.

In conventional hydraulic machinery, throttle control is often independent of the drive levers—a set-and-forget mechanism. This poses a danger on slopes: if an operator panics and releases the drive levers, a high-idle engine might still pump hydraulic fluid, causing the machine to creep or preventing the hydrostatic braking from fully locking. The innovation here is an electronic interlock that correlates joystick position with engine throttle.

If the operator releases the joystick (a “dead man” event), the system essentially performs an electronic clutch-out: it reduces engine RPM to idle and simultaneously engages the fail-safe brake system. This integration of engine management with drive control ensures that the machine enters a zero-energy state immediately upon loss of operator input, utilizing the engine’s compression braking alongside the mechanical brakes to arrest momentum on steep grades.

The Visual Feedback Loop: Solving Mode Confusion

One of the most insidious dangers in remote operation is “mode confusion”—the operator believing the machine is in one state (e.g., parking brake off) when it is in another (e.g., parking brake on). Operating a machine from 300 feet away, visual cues like a depressed brake pedal are invisible.

Patent 12,514,163 addresses this via a “visual indicator of a state of a brake” located directly on the handheld remote. This claim represents a significant advancement in Human-Machine Interface (HMI) design for industrial robotics. By closing the feedback loop and displaying the mechanical state of the machine in the operator’s hands, the system eliminates the ambiguity that leads to burnt-out hydraulic pumps (from driving against the brake) or accidental roll-aways.

Inclinometer-Based Envelope Protection

While the primary focus of this specific patent issuance is the safety interface, it functions in concert with related Embankscape intellectual property (e.g., Patent 11,785,883) that utilizes inclinometers. The system continuously monitors the mower’s pitch and roll. If the machine approaches its static stability limit (e.g., 50 degrees), the control logic can intervene. This “envelope protection”—similar to that found in fly-by-wire aircraft—prevents the operator from commanding the machine into a rollover attitude, regardless of their intent.

Competitive Benchmarking and Market Superiority

To evaluate the commercial weight of the “Wisconsin Patent of the Month,” it is necessary to benchmark the technology against the incumbent solutions in the global marketplace. The primary competitors in the remote-controlled slope mower segment are Spider (s.r.o.) from the Czech Republic and Green Climber from Italy. The RC Mowers R-52, the commercial embodiment of the Embankscape patent, occupies a distinct strategic niche defined by safety integration and US-centric support.

Competitor Profiles

Spider (s.r.o.): The Omnidirectional Pioneer Spider mowers are characterized by their unique “dancing step” chassis. They utilize four driven wheels that can steer 360 degrees, allowing for omnidirectional movement. While this provides exceptional agility, the physics of wheels on steep slopes presents a limitation. The contact patch of a tire is small, and traction on wet grass is limited. Consequently, for extreme slopes (up to 55 degrees), Spider mowers often rely on an integrated hydraulic winch system that tethers the machine to an anchor point at the top of the slope. This introduces significant setup time and complexity.

Green Climber: The Hydraulic Powerhouse Manufactured by MDB in Italy, Green Climber machines are tracked forestry mulchers designed for brute force. They feature extendable tracks that widen the machine’s footprint for stability. Their primary advantage is hydraulic flow rate, allowing them to power heavy mulching heads. However, their reliance on pure mechanical stability (track width) without the sophisticated electronic envelope protection found in the Embankscape patent leaves more responsibility on the operator to judge slope angles.

RC Mowers (Embankscape): The Integrated Safety Solution The R-52 differentiates itself by addressing the “human factor.” By integrating the safety features protected by Patent 12,514,163, the R-52 allows for winch-free operation up to 50 degrees. The system’s reliance on tracks rather than wheels provides a larger contact patch for traction, while the electronic safety interlocks provide the confidence required to operate without a physical tether.

Comparative Analysis Matrix

The following table benchmarks the RC Mowers R-52 against its primary rivals, highlighting the specific advantages derived from the patented technology.

The “Safety Gap” Visualization

The competitive landscape can be visualized not just by raw specs, but by the “safety envelope” provided to the operator. While Green Climber pushes the physical limits of slope adhesion, and Spider pushes the limits of agility, RC Mowers utilizes Patent 12,514,163 to push the limits of control integrity.

R&D Tax Credit Analysis: Navigating the Four-Part Test

The development of the technology described in Patent 12,514,163 is a paradigmatic example of “Qualified Research” as defined by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). However, possessing a patent is not, in itself, sufficient to claim the Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credit. The taxpayer must demonstrate that the activities undertaken during the development process satisfy the rigorous Four-Part Test of IRC § 41.

The following analysis reconstructs the likely development narrative of the Embankscape slope mower to illustrate how such a project aligns with each component of the test.

Part 1: The Permitted Purpose Test

The Statutory Requirement: The activity must aim to create a new or improved business component—defined as a product, process, computer software, technique, formula, or invention—held for sale, lease, or license. The improvement must relate to function, performance, reliability, or quality.

Application to Patent 12,514,163:

The development of the R-52 Slope Mower serves a clear Permitted Purpose. Embankscape Equipment LLC sought to develop a new product (the mower itself) and improve the reliability and quality of remote operation systems.

• Functional Improvement: The integration of the “soft-start clutch” improves the drive function by preventing shock loads to the track system.
• Performance Improvement: The ability to mow 50-degree slopes without a winch is a direct performance metric improvement over existing winch-dependent solutions.
• Reliability Improvement: The fail-safe brake logic ensures the machine stops reliably even in the event of power or signal failure, addressing a critical safety reliability concern.

Part 2: The Technological in Nature Test

The Statutory Requirement: The research must fundamentally rely on principles of the “hard sciences,” such as engineering, physics, chemistry, biology, or computer science. The taxpayer does not need to expand the field of science, but must apply existing principles in a non-routine way.

Application to Patent 12,514,163:

The creation of the safety features relied heavily on interdisciplinary engineering principles:

• Computer Science & Electronics: The development of the 2-way communication protocol required firmware engineering to handle packet loss, latency management, and the logic gates for the throttle/brake interlock. The snippet mentions “automatically enabling the mower throttle… based on manipulation of a joystick”, which implies complex control algorithms.
• Mechanical Engineering: The design of the fail-safe brake system required calculations involving static friction coefficients, shear stress on brake components at high angles, and thermal dissipation rates for the hydraulic system.
• Physics: The entire chassis design is a physics problem: calculating the center of mass to prevent tipping at a 50-degree inclination.

Part 3: The Elimination of Uncertainty Test

The Statutory Requirement: The taxpayer must demonstrate that, at the outset of the project, there was uncertainty regarding the capability (can we do it?), methodology (how do we do it?), or appropriate design (what is the optimal way to do it?).

Application to Patent 12,514,163:

Innovation is born from uncertainty. For the R-52 project, several key uncertainties likely existed:

• Methodological Uncertainty (Hydraulic vs. Electronic): How do you interface a digital remote control with a high-pressure hydraulic drive system without introducing “jerkiness” that could cause the machine to slide? The team likely faced uncertainty on whether to use Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) valves or stepper motors to achieve the “soft-start” capability.
• Design Uncertainty (Sensor Integration): Where should the inclinometers be placed to avoid vibration noise from the mowing deck while still providing accurate readings?
• Capability Uncertainty (RF Reliability): Could a 2-way communication link be maintained reliably in a noise-heavy industrial environment (near power lines or steel structures) at the required range of 1,000 feet?

Part 4: The Process of Experimentation Test

The Statutory Requirement: The taxpayer must engage in a process of evaluating alternatives through modeling, simulation, systematic trial and error, or testing. This is the most critical and documentation-heavy aspect of the test.

Application to Patent 12,514,163:

This test requires proof of the scientific method in action.

• Simulation: Before cutting metal, engineers likely used CAD software to simulate the mower’s stability at various angles.
• Systematic Trial and Error: The development of the “soft-start clutch” implies an iterative process. The team would have tested “Clutch Profile A,” observed that it engaged too aggressively causing track slip, analyzed the data, and developed “Clutch Profile B.”
• Prototype Testing: The snippet mentions an “Improved camera from more safety, visibility and clarity”. This suggests that “Camera A” was tested and rejected due to poor dynamic range or latency, leading to the selection of “Camera B.” Each of these failed tests is evidence of the Process of Experimentation.

Swanson Reed’s Methodology: Substantiating the Claim

While the technical narrative of Patent 12,514,163 clearly aligns with the intent of the R&D Tax Credit, the practical reality of claiming the credit relies on rigorous substantiation. The IRS does not simply accept that research occurred; they require contemporaneous documentation linking specific expenses (wages, supplies, contractors) to specific research activities. This is where Swanson Reed’s specialized methodology becomes indispensable.

The Documentation Deficit

Engineers are trained to solve problems, not to log their thought processes for tax authorities. Consequently, many eligible companies lose out on credits because they cannot reconstruct the “story” of their research years later. “Failed” experiments—which are the gold standard of proof for the R&D credit—are often discarded or overwritten, leaving only the final, successful design. Swanson Reed addresses this structural deficit through a combination of AI technology and human expertise.

TaxTrex: The AI-Driven Solution

Swanson Reed employs TaxTrex, a proprietary AI software designed to bridge the gap between engineering workflows and tax compliance.

• Real-Time Capture: Instead of asking engineers to remember what they did 12 months ago, TaxTrex allows for real-time surveying. For the R-52 project, an engineer could quickly log a “failed stability test” via a simple interface.
• AI Tagging: The software uses Natural Language Processing (NLP) to analyze these entries and “tag” them against the Four-Part Test. It identifies that the “failed stability test” is evidence of the “Elimination of Uncertainty” and “Process of Experimentation.”
• Audit Trail Generation: TaxTrex compiles these disparate data points into a cohesive technical narrative, time-stamping the evidence to prove it was contemporaneous. This transforms scattered engineering notes into a defensible legal document.

The 6-Eye Review Process

Automation provides efficiency, but human judgment provides security. Swanson Reed mandates a 6-Eye Review process for every claim, ensuring a “defense-in-depth” strategy.

1. Eye Pair 1: The Qualified Engineer. A technical expert reviews the project descriptions (e.g., the schematics of the slope mower) to ensure they genuinely meet the “Technological in Nature” standard. They ensure the claim isn’t based on aesthetic changes or routine data collection.
2. Eye Pair 2: The Tax Attorney. A legal expert reviews the contracts and funding structures. In the case of Embankscape, they would verify that the research wasn’t “funded” by a client in a way that forfeits the rights to the credit (the “funded research” exclusion).
3. Eye Pair 3: The CPA. A financial expert reviews the calculation of the Qualified Research Expenses (QREs). They ensure that the nexus between the employee’s time and the research activity is mathematically accurate and consistent with the “Substantially All” rule.

CreditARMOR: The Shield Against Audit Risk

Recognizing that R&D credits are a high-priority area for IRS enforcement, Swanson Reed offers CreditARMOR, a comprehensive audit management and insurance product.

• Predictive Risk Assessment: Before filing, the system analyzes the claim for statistical outliers that might trigger an audit (e.g., an unusually high wage percentage allocated to R&D).
• Defense Indemnification: In the event of an audit, CreditARMOR covers the cost of the defense, including the fees for specialist tax attorneys and technical consultants. This allows companies to innovate with the confidence that their tax position is insured against the cost of controversy.

Final Thoughts: The Intersection of Innovation and Incentive

The issuance of US Patent 12,514,163 is a landmark event for the vegetation management industry. It signifies a move away from purely mechanical solutions toward intelligent, cyber-physical systems that prioritize human safety. By solving the complex physics of slope stability through advanced communication protocols and interlock logic, Embankscape Equipment LLC has created a product with immediate, life-saving potential.

However, the journey from concept to patent is paved with risk and expenditure. The R&D Tax Credit exists precisely to incentivize this type of high-stakes engineering. By understanding the alignment between the technical reality of the invention and the legal requirements of the Four-Part Test, and by leveraging the advanced compliance infrastructure provided by Swanson Reed, innovative companies can secure the capital needed to continue pushing the boundaries of what is possible. The R-52 mower is not just a machine; it is a testament to the power of American innovation, supported by a tax code designed to foster it.