Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 17/726,927

METHOD OF CONTROLLING A ROBOT IN RELATION TO A SERVICE SCHEDULE

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Apr 22, 2022
Examiner
KARWAN, SIHAR A
Art Unit
3658
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Carnegie Robotics, LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
215 granted / 385 resolved
+3.8% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
426
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.3%
-28.7% vs TC avg
§103
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§102
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 385 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 1-11 are rejected. Amendments to the claims have been recorded. Notes: Examiner Interview Summary dated 5/28/2025. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding Applicant’s Arguments Applicant’s arguments based on amendments are addressed with the rejections to the amendments. Applicant argues that for dependent claim 7, Williams notes that the robotic platform (100) may impose priority based decision making, e.g., wherein a plan indicates which areas are to receive priority or deletion of tasks where time consuming obstacles or mechanical failures are encountered. (Williams, para. [57]). However, amended claims 1 and 8 relate to the type of "activity" that is to be performed as one or more of the parameters. Moreover, "priority" is not the same as "a point in time" at which a task may be initiated or must be finalized. Priority may be given to tasks which may be initiated at any point in time, wherein such tasks will be initiated first (see Williams, para. [57]); however, such priority is not described in Williams as being tied to a set point in time. Examiner strongly disagrees, Priority as defined in the Oxford dictionary is “to precede before others”. Before is a time based statement. Before “during the period of time preceding a particular event or time.” Additionally, Williams par 29 teaches priority based time e.g. scheduling [deadline], prioritized based on time of day [also deadline] and enough time to perform the task [deadline], time allocated for completion of the service[deadline]. Appellant argues deadline but no such limitations are found in the claims. Applicant argues that Williams is silent regarding the parameters of a maximum speed that the robot should not exceed, and of predetermined limits for irradiation, pressure, and suction force that the robot should not exceed. Examiner notes that this limitation falls under the one or more parameters being selected from the group consisting of: is a Markus limitation and is fully addressed as “one” of the parameters has been selected from the group. 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 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. (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Williams US 2018013538. 1. Williams teaches a method of controlling a robot, the method comprising: a) feeding a service schedule to a self-propelled robot, the service schedule identifying a plurality of tasks for the robot to perform, (Williams Fig.1 and para 22; The robotic platform 100 may provide a service planning facility 120, such as including the ability to generate and store service plans 128 for one or more task areas) b) performing one or more of the plurality of tasks with the robot, (Williams para 3-4; 20; The robotic platform 100, through a main body 214 portion, provides common functions and processes for executing service tasks for the plurality of service modules 102A-D. The robotic platform 100 provides processing 106 capabilities (e.g., electronics, processing, software, and the like) to execute operational functionality.) c) generating corresponding information, using the robot, after the robot does not completing a first task of the plurality of tasks, (Williams para 49; the robotic platform may cease operation if conditions dictate, the robotic platform 100 may store instances of disrupted operations for further processing, such as to come back to that location later to cover an area that was skipped.) d) after step c), performing another of the plurality of tasks with the robot, and (Williams para 72; Once a task or plan has been completed, a map view illustration screen 2600 may be provided to indicate areas the robot platform 100 missed, such as skipping as a result of encountering an obstacle 146, needing to return to a special treatment area 144, and the like.) e) identifying and outputting, based on the corresponding information, information relating to the first task to a service provider, (Williams. Para 60; For example, if a robotic platform 100 senses the heat signature of footprints across a marble floor at midnight in an otherwise empty airport terminal, such information may be used to generate and transmit an alert to security personnel [service provider].) wherein the service schedule comprises, for the first task, one or more parameters according to which the robot should perform the first task, (Williams para 67; tasks performed by the robotic platform 100 in the performance of a plan that requires cleaning such a room may proceed according to a rule that notes the preferred use of ultra- wide band signal localization when in the room.) the one or more parameters being selected from the group consisting of: a point in time at which the first task must be finalized, para 28; a schedule for servicing an earliest point in time at which the first task may be initiated, para 28; a schedule for servicing a period of time within which the first task must be performed, para 28; a schedule for servicing a maximum limit of speed the robot, and para 28; a schedule for servicing predetermined limits for at least one of irradiation, pressure, and a suction force limit of the robot; wherein step c) comprises the robot not having performed the first task based on the one or more parameters; and (Williams para 72; a map view illustration screen 2600 may be provided to indicate areas the robot platform 100 missed, such as skipping as a result of encountering an obstacle 146, needing to return to a special treatment area 144, and the like.) wherein the corresponding information comprises information identifying the one or more parameters of the first task not being met. (Williams para 72; provided to indicate areas the robot platform 100 missed [not being met], as a result of encountering an obstacle 146, and the like.) 2. Williams teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and, further comprising: reverting to and completing the first task with the robot, wherein the corresponding information relates to an expenditure required by the robot to revert to and completer the first task, wherein the expenditure is selected from the group consisting of time, power, and a consumable.(Williams para 88; an updated service plan comprising at least one task directed to completing the suspended task, and operating the removable service module 102A-D to service the generally planar surface proximate the robotic platform 100 in accordance with the updated service plan. Para 89; the robotic platform 100 may provide for machine learning adaptive service plan tasking, such as the robotic platform 100 adjusting its plan tasking (e.g., from day to day) [time] based on what it has learned from past service executions. Also; the robotic platform 100 may provide for operational sensor suite optimization selection for power conservation [over and a consumable] in the robotic platform, such as for conserving power through selection of active sensors during service.) 3. Williams teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the robot is configured to sense and avoid obstacles; wherein step c) comprises the robot sensing an obstacle preventing the robot from performing the first task; and wherein the corresponding information comprises information related to the obstacle. (Williams para 72; a map view illustration screen 2600 [information related to the obstacle] may be provided to indicate areas the robot platform 100 missed, such as skipping as a result of encountering an obstacle 146 [sense and avoid obstacles], needing to return to a special treatment area 144, and the like.) Also see para 37 and 52 4. The method according to claim 1, wherein the first task is a step of treating a first surface area, wherein the corresponding information relates to a position and an area, of the first surface area, which is not cleansed. (Williams para 72; a map view illustration screen 2600 may be provided to indicate areas the robot platform 100 missed [not cleansed], such as skipping as a result of encountering an obstacle 146, needing to return to a special treatment area 144, and the like.) 5. Williams teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the first task comprises transporting predetermined goods from a pick-up position to a delivery position, and wherein the corresponding information relates to the goods, the delivery position and/or the pick-up position. 6. Williams teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the one or more parameters further includes a minimum quality with which the first task must be performed. (Williams para 30; the robotic platform 100 may conclude from the analysis that it should return to the special treatment area because it will take an amount of time that is within a time constraint availability (e.g., there's enough time left in the work day to complete the re-treatment, there's enough charge left in the batteries to complete the re-treatment, and the like).) Also, para 37 and 52 7. Williams teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein step d) comprises the robot receiving instructions to perform an additional task and the robot performing the additional task; and wherein the corresponding information relates to an expenditure needed by the robot to perform the additional task and all remaining tasks of the service schedule, (Williams para 57; the robotic platform 100 may react to priority attributes or may impose priority based decision making in an autonomous fashion when completing tasks. For example, a plan may specifically indicate which areas are to receive priority. In other instances, the robotic platform 100 may decide, for example in the instance where time consuming obstacle avoidance or mechanical failure has been encountered, that it is not possible to complete the specified plan in the amount of time available to complete the tasks. In such instances, the robotic platform 100 may make autonomous decisions regarding the completion and deletion of various tasks or, conversely, may notify a human supervisor of an inability to complete the tasks as specified and may in response receive an updated plan.) wherein the expenditure is selected from the group consisting of time (para 57; priority) , power and consumable. 8. is rejected using the same rejections made to claim 1. 9. is rejected using the same rejections made to claim 2. 10. is rejected using the same rejections made to claim 3. 11. is rejected using the same rejections made to claim 7. 12. The method according to claim 2, wherein the robot tracks the expenditure during performance of the plurality of tasks up to an estimated expenditure required to revert to and complete the first task. (para 76; he robotic platform 100 may provide for sensor-based detection and tracking of a service-area-edge-condition during service area plan 128 execution. Furthermore para 72; a map view illustration screen 2600 [information related to the obstacle] may be provided to indicate areas the robot platform 100 missed, such as skipping as a result of encountering an obstacle 146 [sense and avoid obstacles], needing to return to a special treatment area 144, and the like.) Also see para 37 and 52 Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIHAR A KARWAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2747. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 11am.-7pm. 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, Ramon Mercado can be reached on 571-270-5744. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /SIHAR A KARWAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 22, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Aug 07, 2024
Response Filed
Nov 22, 2024
Final Rejection — §102
Jan 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 31, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Apr 15, 2025
Interview Requested
May 22, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 22, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 05, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589502
CARGO-HANDLING APPARATUS, CONTROL DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589750
VEHICULAR CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589504
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COGNITIVE SURVEILLANCE ROBOT FOR SECURING INDOOR SPACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583100
ROBOT TO WHICH DIRECT TEACHING IS APPLIED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576516
HUMAN SKILL BASED PATH GENERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
56%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+15.4%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 385 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month