DETAILED ACTION
The Applicant’s amendment filed on December 3, 2025 was received. Claims 1-31, 34, 38 and 45-54 are now canceled. Claims 32, 36, 41, 43 and 55 were amended. Claim 56 was added.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action issued September 11, 2025.
Claim Rejections- 35 USC § 112
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, on claims 32-33, 35-37, 39-44 and 55 are withdrawn because the claims have been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson on claims 32-33 and 36-44 are withdrawn because the claims have been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson on claims 35 and 55 are withdrawn because the claims have been amended.
Please consider the following.
Claims 32-33, 35-37, 39-44 and 55-56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson (WO2018/136499, corresponding US 2019/0374966 cited below) in view of Harvison (US 2018/0318865).
In regards to claims 32, Thompson teaches an automated mobile spray (AMS) system (10) comprising:
a base-18 (mobile base) comprising a lateral axis and a longitudinal axis (fig. 1, 6; para. 40-41);
a plurality of wheels-22 and wheel motors-24 (drive system) move the base-18 (fig. 1, 6; para. 41-42);
an applicator assembly-14 (spray module) is supported on the base, the applicator assembly-14 moves along a vertical axis relative to the base, the applicator assembly-14 comprising a nozzle-40 which sprays a fluid longitudinally towards the target surface (fig. 1-2, 6; para. 41, 44, 47-48);
one or more sensors-44 (indicator sensor), capable of being distance sensors, location sensors, inertial sensors, or optical sensors,
where distance sensor is capable of being proximity sensor, radar transducer, ultrasonic and/or acoustic rangefinder, laser rangefinder, magnetometer, radar, and lidar,
where the optical sensor can monitor and assess which areas of surface 62 AMS 12 has applied fluid to, is applying fluid to, and will apply fluid to,
where inertial sensors can provide information regarding the movement and/or acceleration (fig. 1-2, 5; para. 41, 48).
The sensors-44 detecting distance or assessing the surface or providing information regarding the movement and/or acceleration all represent indicators which are delivered to a controller (74, control circuity) (fig. 2; para. 53, 55, 57-59 ).
The controller controls the movement of the AMS relative to the target surface and control vertical spraying once sensors-44 provide feedback to the controller to indicate when nozzle 40 is properly positioned to apply the fluid along the second horizontal spray path (fig. 2, 6; para. 58-59, 70, 74, 77-79).
Thompson also teaches the use of a mobile nodes-170a-b and stationary nodes (168a-168c) (first indicator mat) which support locating and mapping of the AMS. Thompson teaches the stationary nodes indicate positions of boundary points for controlling the spray on and spray off (fig. 6; para. 117, 119-124).
Thompson does not explicitly teach the first indicator formed separately from the AMS and placed on or adjacent to the target surface and the first indicator configured to at least provide a spray instruction to the AMS, the one or more indicator sensors configured to sense the first indicator that is located on or adjacent to the target surface and the indicator sensors generates indicator data based on the indicator sensors sensing the first indicator.
However, Harvison teaches an autonomous painting robot (100) comprising a sensor head (213) which sensing operational indicators (216). Harvison teaches the operational indicators are provided on a wall (206), a wall trim (214) and a window trim (215). Harvison teaches when the sensor head senses the operational indicators, it provides color, patterns or style to be applied to the corresponding surface by movement of an applicator (218) (fig. 2-3; para. 50-52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention, to incorporate the sensor head and operation indicators of Harvison onto/with the sensors and automated mobile spray system of Thompson because Harvison teaches it will provide application of paint evenly and uniformly to the targeted application area (para. 8).
In regards to claim 33, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the nodes (170, 168a-168c) provide information to the controller with regards to a spray area (172) and non-spray area (174) (fig. 6; para. 121) and Harvison teaches operational indicators provide information regarding proper color, patterns or style to be applied to the surface (para. 51), where one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize, the information will include a non-spray area.
In regards to claims 35-36 and 56, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the sensors-44 and/or nodes comprises optical or proximity sensor (para. 48, 119) and Harvison teaches operational indicators maybe in the form of image or a scannable code such as a QR code (para. 51), where sensors/operational indicators which are placed walls or trim are capable of being passed over by the sensor in order to obtain the information which scanned.
In regards to claim 37, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the nodes transmit and/or receive RF signals (para. 119), which would characterize an RFID tag/receiver (para. 119).
In regards to claim 39, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the sensors-44 are on an applicator arm-38 connected to the base-18 (fig. 1-2, 5; para. 48) and the mobile node-170 is position on the nozzle which is on base-18 (fig. 6; para. 119).
In regards to claim 40, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the stationary nodes (168a-168c) (first indicator mat) are placed on the ground around the AMS (fig. 6; para. 117, 119-124) and Harvison teaches the operational indicators are provided on a wall (206), a wall trim (214) and a window trim (215) (para. 51).
In regards to claim 41, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the stationary nodes (168a-168c) (first indicator mat) are placed on the ground aid to define spray and non-spray areas to control spraying, such as when to stop spraying based on the stationary node (fig. 6; para. 121-122, 124).
In regards to claim 42, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the AMS moves laterally relative to the surface, which includes moving laterally past non-spray area (174) where mobile node(s) (170) is positioned at the transition from a spray area to non-spray area (fig. 6; para. 117, 120-121).
In regards to claims 43-44, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the AMS will move past the non-spray area (174) to a spray area (172), where a mobile node(s) (170) is positioned at the transition from a non-spray area to the spray area, the non-spray area break up the spray of fluid to provide applying partial swath of spray to the surface(fig. 6; para. 117, 120-121).
In regards to claim 55, Thompson and Harvison as discussed above, where Thompson teaches the one or more sensors-44 that is a distance sensor (path sensor) which is connected to the controller, where the controller is capable of the process of:
determines a first distance from a feature (fig. 1-2, 6; para. 55, 80, 111)
determines the first overlap parameter or overlap distance of the vertical swaths of the spray fluid applied by the nozzle-40 based on the first distance, the first overlap parameter indicating a first degree or percentage of overlap between consecutive vertical swaths sprayed by the nozzle-40 (fig. 6; para. 79-81, 83-84, 92);
control the base-18 and nozzle-40 to spray at least one vertical swath based on the first overlap parameter for a first portion of the target surface (fig. 6; para. 80-81, 83-84, 92);
determine a second distance to the feature, the second distance is capable of being shorter than the first distance (fig. 6; para. 79-81, 83-84, 92);
determine a second overlap parameter of the vertical swath based on the second distance, the second overlap parameter indicating a second degree of overlap between consecutive vertical swaths sprayed by the nozzle-40 (fig. 6; para. 79-81, 83-84, 92);
control the base-18 and the nozzle-40 to spray at least one vertical swath based on the second overlap parameter for a second portion of the target surface (fig. 6; para. 79-81, 83-84, 92).
Thompson and Harvison do not explicitly teach the process of receive the look-ahead data from at least one path/distance sensor oriented to look ahead on a travel path of the AMS and to generate look-ahead data regarding a distance to a feature in the travel path.
However, Thompson teaches the marking of boundary points-178 is used to form a spray plan by the controller (para. 111, 122-123).
Thompson teaches control of the distance between the nozzle-40 and the surface provides for high quality even finish on the surface (para. 94)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to recognize the forming a spray plan includes recognizing changes in distance between the feature and the nozzle and providing the adjustment to maintain the desired distance so that the high quality finish will be maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response filed December 3, 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 32 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Thompson and Harvison.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Binu Thomas whose telephone number is (571)270-7684. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/Binu Thomas/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights