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 .
Status of the Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants’ filing on 06/18/2026. Claims 1-22 were previously pending, of which claims 1 and 11 have been amended, and no claims have been cancelled or newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-22 are currently pending and are being examined below.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Applicant's remarks, see pages 1-6, filed 06/18/2026; Applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
With respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), the amendment renders this rejection moot, the amended claims are no longer rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b).
With respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102/103, applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Further consideration of the prior art of record determined that the previously applied prior art does appear to disclose the amended claim language. In light of the new scope, it appears Bernini in view of Ott most closely aligns with the newly amended claims. Due to the nature of the applicant’s amendments, the scope of the applicant’s invention has changed. New application of prior art addresses the amended language, as mapped below. Therefore, the amended claims are newly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and have been updated in the office action below.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 8-9, 11-13, 15, 18-19, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Bernini (EP 3324261 A1), hereinafter Bernini, in view of Ott et al. (US 2018/0143634 A1), hereinafter Ott.
With respect to claims 1 and 11, Bernini discloses a system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more non-transitory computer readable media having instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (see at least [0045] “The system… also comprises a remote memory unit 200 electrically connected to its own electronic processor and accessible remotely via radio from the radio module of the lawn mower robot 100.”)
receiving, for a mowing area, a mowing task comprising a mow pattern; (see at least [0049] “remote memory unit 200 processes a cutting strategy which advantageously comprises at least one path 300 to be followed by the lawn mower robot 100.”)
completing the mowing task by autonomously controlling the movement of an autonomous lawn mower based on the mow pattern; (see at least [0055] “the lawn mower robots 100 are powered up and start to cut the grass of the various zones of the area A with their cutting means 102 following a predetermined path 300 on the basis of the cutting strategy decided in the first step;”)
receiving data from the autonomous lawn mower while completing the mowing task, the data comprising sensor data from one or more sensors associated with the autonomous lawn mower, wherein the sensor data is captured in accordance with the mow pattern determined to complete the mowing task; (see at least [0055] “as the lawn mower robots 100 gradually carry out the cutting, they send ambient data (block 1003) towards the remote memory unit 200 which decides whether to modify the cutting strategy” Note: During completion is interpreted to describe the actual progression of the mowing.)
autonomously controlling the movement of the autonomous lawn mower while completing the subsequent mowing task for the mowing area based on the updated mow pattern, wherein the subsequent mowing task is performed at a later time than the mowing task. (see at least [0031] “the movement strategy or cutting strategy means the prior programming of a movement path of one or more lawn mower robots 100 within the lawn area A, and subsequent activation of the movement means 101 in accordance with the prior programming.”)
Bernini discloses the mowing of a lawn by an autonomous lawn mower using an updated path, but does not explicitly disclose the determination of a completed mowing task and updating the mow pattern based on completion.
However, Ott teaches determining that the mowing task is complete; (see at least [0102] “method 800 determines that an end of location data 154 has been reached, path program 122 is complete”)
determining, using the sensor data, an updated mow pattern for completing the a subsequent mowing task for the mowing area, based at least in part on determining that the mowing task is complete; (see at least [0070] “During collection, or once collection is completed, location data 154 is uploaded to ROC 120 and processed by path program generator 310 to generate path program 122.” [0102] “Path program 122 is stored within ROC 120 until requested by control executive 250 when robot 102 is about to operate.”)
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the autonomous lawnmower control of Bernini to include the end point disclosed in Ott, with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a determination that the path had been completed and the control could be terminated, see Ott [0102].
With respect to claims 2 and 12, Bernini discloses the mowing of a lawn by an autonomous lawn mower using an updated path and detecting a low charge, but does not explicitly disclose the monitoring of the diagnostic data of the autonomous lawnmower.
However, Ott discloses the one or more processors further perform, based at least in part on the data, generating information indicative of a diagnostic of the autonomous lawn mower, and wherein the diagnostic comprises one or more of: a state of charge of a battery of the autonomous lawn mower, a motor temperature of a motor of the autonomous lawn mower, a tire pressure of a wheel associated with the autonomous lawnmower, an attribute of blade maintenance, a total time mowed while mowing the pattern followed by the autonomous lawn mower while traversing an environment, a distance travelled by the autonomous lawn mower since a last maintenance service, a mow pattern tracking error, a number of instances of human intervention while completing the mow pattern, a battery health, software and computing diagnostic information for lawn mower software and hardware, or functionality of the one or more sensors. ([0041] “Controller 202 communicates with a plurality of sensors 230, such as a… battery gauge, and/or fuel gauge. Using sensors 230, controller 202 determines a current status 270 of robot 102.” [0063] “Dashboard 382 also shows a bar graph 416 representing one or more of: available fuel and/or battery level, available treatment material 224, and so on.” [0057-0058])
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the autonomous lawnmower control of Bernini to include the status monitoring disclosed in Ott, with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to resolve situations encountered by the robot that cannot be resolved by the robot, see Ott [0056].
With respect to claims 3 and 13, Bernini discloses the one or more processors further perform, based at least in part on the data, generating information indicative of an attribute associated with an environment, (see at least [0011] “inhibiting areas inside the perimeter of the area… progressively stored in accordance with the plurality of ambient data.”)
and wherein the attribute comprises one or more of: characteristics of a lawn mowed by the autonomous lawn mower, position of obstacles in the environment, identity of obstacles in the environment, identity of vegetation in the environment, or position of vegetation in the environment. (see at least [0038] “The data processing unit is programmed to receive the ambient data coming from the contact or proximity sensors 103 and from the stereoscopic video camera 110, if installed, and to execute a processing of the data aimed at defining a position in the area A of the obstacles detected by them.” [0035] “obstacles, such as, for example and without limiting the scope of the invention, plants and shrubs.”)
With respect to claims 5 and 15, Bernini discloses the one or more processors further perform receiving additional data from at least one additional autonomous lawn mower, and the autonomous lawn mower and the at least one additional autonomous lawn mower operate collectively as a fleet of autonomous lawn mowers. (see at least [0052] “The presence of obstacles, encountered by the robot mower 100… is transmitted as ambient data towards the remote memory unit 200 and processed… in real time, so as to update instantaneously the path 300 that the other lawn mower robots 100 may travel along, precisely according to the presence of the obstacles.”)
With respect to claims 8 and 18, Bernini discloses the one or more sensors comprise one or more of a camera, a radar, a lidar, an ultrasonic transducer, or a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver, (see at least [0034] “the contact or proximity sensors 103 are radar sensors or impact sensors” [0039] “a localisation module 105 conveniently using a GPS/GLONASS satellite receiver which is able to allow positioning of the lawn mower robot 100”)
and wherein the one or more processors further perform: determining, based at least in part on the sensor data, a location of one or more obstacles in an environment associated with the mow pattern; (see at least [0033] “sensor means which assist the definition of its position, as well as the detection of obstacles and allow a better operation in the strategy of mowing the lawn.” [0038] “defining a position in the area A of the obstacles detected by them.”)
and determining, based at least in part on the obstacles, a further updated mow pattern for the at least one lawn mower based on the updated mow pattern; (see at least [0052] “update instantaneously the path 300 that the other lawn mower robots 100 may travel along, precisely according to the presence of the obstacles.”)
and transmitting, to the at least one autonomous lawn mower, the further updated mow pattern. (see at least [0022] “updating of the movement strategy according to the plurality of parameters, and a step for transmitting the updated movement strategy towards the plurality of lawn mower robots.”)
With respect to claims 9 and 19, Bernini discloses the updated mow pattern comprises a mow pattern that minimizes one or more of an amount of energy or an amount of time for the at least one autonomous lawn mower to complete mowing in accordance with the mow pattern. (see at least [0057] “By controlling and progressively updating the position of two or more automatic lawn mower robots as described above it is possible to optimise the time taken in cutting the grass in the predetermined area A, avoiding an unnecessary waste of time and energy in repassing a second lawn mower robot over a zone of the area A wherein the lawn has already been cut.”)
With respect to claims 21 and 22, Bernini discloses the updated mow pattern is associated with at least one of a reduced amount of time to traverse the environment relative to the mow pattern, a minimal amount of time to complete mowing the mow pattern, a less amount of energy relative to the mow pattern, a minimal amount of energy to complete mowing the mow pattern, a fewer number of stripes relative to the mow pattern, a fewer number of obstacles relative to the mow pattern, or a shorter distance travelled relative to the mow pattern. (see at least [0057] “By controlling and progressively updating the position of two or more automatic lawn mower robots as described above it is possible to optimise the time taken in cutting the grass in the predetermined area A, avoiding an unnecessary waste of time and energy in repassing a second lawn mower robot over a zone of the area A wherein the lawn has already been cut.”)
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernini in view of Ott as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Balutis et al. (US 2019/0250604 A1), hereinafter Balutis.
With respect to claims 4 and 14, Bernini discloses the mowing of a lawn by an autonomous lawn mower using an updated path, but does not explicitly disclose the remaining path includes a number of stripes.
However, Balutis teaches the one or more processors further perform, based at least in part on the data, generating information indicative of a metric associated with the autonomous lawn mower, and wherein the metric comprises one or more of: an amount of area covered during the mowing task, a number of stripes required to cover the mowing area, an average number of times a portion of the mowing area was cut, an average area per time, an amount of time used by the autonomous lawn mower to mow the mow pattern, an amount of energy used by the autonomous lawnmower to mow the mow pattern, or a total area mowed by the autonomous lawnmower. (see at least [0062] “FIG. 4G depicts an example screenshot of the displayed map image 460 with a graphic overlay 468 showing a graphic overlay 466 showing the progress of the robot lawnmower 10 and a projected remaining path of the robot lawnmower 10 as it mows the lawn.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bernini to include the above limitations as detailed in Balutis with the motivation being to increase user convenience by allowing the user to easily visualize both the portion of the yard mowed and the path to be followed to complete the mowing as detailed in Balutis [0062].
Claims 6-7, 10, 16-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernini in view of Ott as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of He et al. (US 2019/0278269 A1), hereinafter He.
With respect to claims 6 and 16, Bernini discloses the mowing of a lawn by an autonomous lawn mower using sensor data, but does not explicitly disclose determining additional landscaping services required.
However, He teaches one or more processors to perform operations comprising: determining, using the sensor data, additional landscaping service required in an environment, including at least one of: maintenance on trees, maintenance on bushes, trash removal, a tree to be cut, a bush to be trimmed, a portion of the mowing area needing lawn maintenance, a region requiring a change in irrigation levels, or a location of leaves to be removed. (see at least [0016] “In one of embodiments, the working module comprises at least two of a grass cutting module, a liquid spraying module, a fertilizing module, a soil loosening module, a fallen leaves collecting module, a sowing module, a withered grass removing module, and a sweeping module, to respectively perform the corresponding lawn care works.”)
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Bernini to include the above limitations disclosed in He, with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a user with a single robot that can complete multiple functions to the user doesn’t need to select different functional machines at different times and to control on and off the different functional machines when performing courtyard maintenance, see He [0005].
With respect to claims 7 and 17, Bernini discloses the data is received at a first time, and wherein the operations further comprise: receiving, at a second time after the first time, additional data from the autonomous lawn mower; (see at least [0052] “The presence of obstacles, encountered by the robot mower 100… is transmitted as ambient data towards the remote memory unit 200 and processed… in real time”)
Bernini discloses the mowing of a lawn by an autonomous lawn mower using sensor data but does not explicitly disclose determining additional landscaping services required.
However, He teaches confirming, based at least in part on the additional data, whether the additional landscaping service has been taken care of. (see at least Fig. 7, [0280] “The self-moving gardening robot 100 enters the designated location point to perform water spraying and transmits completion information to the application after precise water spraying is done at the preset location.”)
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ott to include the above limitations disclosed in He, with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide the user a relevant condition of completion of precise water spraying at a location by the self-moving gardening robot 100, see He [0280].
With respect to claims 10 and 20, Bernini discloses the mowing of a lawn by an autonomous lawn mower using sensor data, but does not explicitly disclose determining additional landscaping services required.
However, He teaches the attribute of the environment further comprises: at least one environment requirement of a job site based on the sensor data, (see at least [0198] “The service end 300 collects and counts data of the self-moving gardening robot 100 through the user equipment 200 or/and sends various prompt instructions to the user equipment 200.”)
and the operations further comprise notifying a customer of the at least one environment requirement including services to fulfill the at least one environment requirement. (see at least [0270] “prompt the user of the specific low-frequency functional task that needs to be performed on the part of the working area, so that the user performs functional task switch.”)
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ott to include the above limitations disclosed in He, with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide the user a relevant condition of completion of precise water spraying at a location by the self-moving gardening robot 100, see He [0280].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHELLEY MARIE OSTERHOUT whose telephone number is (703)756-1595. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM.
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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached on (571) 272-7691. 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.
/S.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights