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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CRF 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/16/2026 has been entered.
Status
In response to the amendment filed on 10/29/2025, claims 1 and 13 have been amended, and claims 2, 5, and 7 are cancelled. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, and 8-18 are pending and under examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 13, the terms may be amended as “[[a]]the computer or controller” in line 7, “the computer or controller” in line 17, “[[a]]the second distance” in line 20, and “the computer or controller” in line 22.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra et al. (US 2018/0360284, hereinafter Borra), in view of Lindau et al. (DE 102017117013A1, cited on 09/16/2022 IDS, hereinafter Lindau), Katuri et al. (DE 102018207260A1, hereinafter Katuri), Lu et al. (CN 103161133A, cited on 09/16/2022 IDS, hereinafter Lu), Tamas et al. (US 2006/0253493, hereinafter Tamas), Shen et al. (CN 102590883A, hereinafter Shen), Tsukada (WO 2014/167393A1), and Akiva et al. (EP 3343172A1, hereinafter Akiva).
Regarding claim 1, Borra discloses a cleaning machine adapted to be steered by a driver for cleaning at least one of a road, a pavement, and a gutter (fig. 1 and ¶ 0030, a sweeper-scrubber 30 for sweeping and scrubbing a floor surface. The machine has a driver seat 50 and a steering wheel 48 to be operated by a driver. The road, pavement, or gutter cleaning is an intended use. The floor scrubber machine of Borra may be used for cleaning the road, pavement, or gutter) comprising
a vehicle (fig. 1, a sweeper-scrubber 30), the vehicle comprising at least one with respect to the vehicle vertically movable broom system (¶ 0038, side brushes 68 [correspond to the recited broom system] can move vertically)
a controller for vertically moving said broom system independently of the vehicle (¶ 0038, the side brushes 68 can be driven by control circuitry [corresponds to the recited controller] and move vertically. The side brushes are driven by a motor, thus the side brushes are independently operated from the vehicle), but does not disclose a pavement track system comprising a 3D camera providing 3D-images, pattern recognition software adapted to process the 3D-images, the vehicle comprises a horizontally movable broom system, and the controller for horizontally moving the broom system independently of the vehicle wherein the controller is adapted to horizontally move the broom system sideways with respect to the vehicle.
Lindau teaches, in an analogous cleaning machine filed of endeavor, a pavement track system comprising a 3D camera providing 3D-images, pattern recognition software adapted to process the 3D-images (fig. 8 and Lindau English translation, p. 11:11-12, the sweeper 100 has a pair of stereo cameras 132 [correspond to the recited 3D camera] and the cameras are connected to an image recognition technique 133; p. 4:3-5, the image system comprises a software for indicating and tracking an object),
the vehicle comprises a horizontally movable broom system, and the controller for horizontally moving the broom system independently of the vehicle wherein the controller is adapted to horizontally move the broom system sideways with respect to the vehicle (Lindau English translation, p. 11:18-19, a controller 182 drives a broom 182. The controller not only moves the broom 182 horizontally to a side but also raises the broom; p. 5:37-50, in response to the detection of direction change, the machine-driven brooms are moved to the side).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra to provide the 3D camera, pattern recognition software, and the controller as taught by Lindau in order to sweep a ground semi-automatically with increased efficiency (Lindau English translation, p. 2:35-43).
Borra as modified by Lindau does not disclose explicitly the pattern recognition software identifies a side of the road and the controller actively controls a second distance between the broom system and side of the road.
However, Lindau teaches the system detects a wall and a guide line in the form of a ground mark or curb (Lindau English translation, p. 6:23-25). The side of the road can be identified as the ground mark or curb. Therefore, Lindau teaches the software identifies the side of the road. In addition, as seen in fig. 5, while the sweeper moves forward, the sweeper moves to position the broom of the sweeper to align with the curb [corresponds to the recited side of the road] as the sweeper approaches the curb, and the brooms are moved to the side (Lindau English translation, p. 5:37-50, 11:18-19). The motion of the sweeper in response to the identification of the wall and the guide line in the form of the ground mark or curb is the active control of the system. Therefore, Lindau teaches the active control of the second distance between the broom system and the side of the road.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pavement track system of Borra as modified by Lindau to identify the side of the road and the controller to actively control the distance as recited so that the sweeper can react to change a direction of motion appropriately and continue the effective cleaning (Lindau English translation, p. 6:25-34).
Borra as modified by Lindau does not disclose explicitly the pattern recognition software measures a first distance from the vehicle to the side of the road.
Katuri teaches, in a vehicle manipulation field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the pattern recognition software measures a first distance from the vehicle to the side of the road (Katuri English translation, 3:1-2, the device comprises a lane width recognition system; p. 9:29-32, the device comprises a software; p. 6:12-13, a device measures a distance from a vehicle to a side to a road).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau to provide the software for measuring the distance as taught by Katuri in order to allow autonomous driving of the vehicle (Katuri English translation, p. 1:11).
Borra as modified by Lindau and Katuri does not disclose the software adapts and corrects for contrast.
Lu teaches, in an analogous cleaning machine field of endeavor, the software adapts and corrects for contrast (Lu English translation, abstract, a road sweeper comprises an image acquisition device; ¶ 0107, a MATLAB® software performs image processing functions including contrast enhancement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau and Katuri to provide the software for contrast adaptation as taught by Lu for effective data visualization (Lu ¶ 0107).
Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, and Lu does not disclose the software adapts for shadow effects.
Tamas teaches, in an image processing field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the software adapts for shadow effects (¶ 0105, a software for processing graphical contents applies shadow effects in masking the graphical contents).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, and Lu to provide the software for shadow effect adaptation as taught by Tamas for improving distinctiveness of an element in an image.
Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, and Tamas does not disclose the software is trained for recognizing the pavement.
Shen teaches, in an image processing field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the software is trained for recognizing the pavement (Shen English translation, ¶ 0031, a software of a monitoring center automatically identifies pavement of a road surface).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, and Tamas to provide the software for recognizing the pavement as taught by Shen. It identifies foreign matter on the road surface for removal in order to eliminate dangerous objects from the road surface (Shen English translation ¶ 0031).
Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, and Shen does not disclose the software is adapted to validate a position of a rising edge.
Tsukada teaches, in an image processing field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the software is adapted to validate a position of a rising edge (fig. 2 and ¶ 0009, an edge detection unit of a vehicle detects a rising edge).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, and Shen to provide the software for validating a position of the rising edge as taught by Tsukada in order to indicate a travel path of the vehicle without crossing over the edge of the road (Tsukada English translation, abstract).
Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, and Tsukada does not disclose the rising edge is validated on at least two consecutive 3D-images.
Akiva teaches, in an image processing field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the rising edge is validated on at least two consecutive images (Akiva, ¶ 0006, imaging devices of a vehicle captures images for analysis of vehicle positioning; ¶ 0017, Object identification involves analysis of two consecutive images).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, and Tsukada to provide the method of validating at least two consecutive images as taught by Akiva for accurate calculation which results in the accurate vehicle positioning (Akiva ¶ 0017).
Regarding claim 4, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising a second broom system, and a third broom system (Borra, fig. 2, the sweeper-scrubber 30 comprises two side brushes 68 and three scrub brushes 56A-56C. Borra’s cleaning machine has a second broom system, a third broom system, and more).
Regarding claim 6, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, further adapted to be steered by an operator (Borra, ¶ 0033, an operator sits on the driver seat 50 and operates the steering wheel 48).
Regarding claim 9, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the controller is adapted to be manually over-ride (Borra, ¶ 0050, an override mode can be activated and an operation mode can be altered by the operator).
Regarding claim 15, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the cleaning machine is a motor vehicle (Borra, ¶ 0062, the sweeper-scrubber 30 is powered by a drive motor to drive wheels).
Regarding claim 16, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 15, further comprising a cab within which the driver steers the cleaning machine while onboard the cleaning machine (Borra, fig. 1 and ¶ 0033, the sweeper-scrubber 30 comprises the driver seat 50 and the steering wheel 48 for a driver to onboard and steer the cleaning machine).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra in view of Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Amin et al. (US 2014/0259476, hereinafter Amin).
Regarding claim 3, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the controller adapts the second distance in view of broom wear.
Amin teaches, in an analogous cleaning machine field of endeavor, the controller adapts the second distance in view of broom wear (¶ 0002, a sweeper vehicle comprises a broom; ¶ 0020, a broom controller adjusts a broom position in response to broom wear). Borra as modified by Lindau and Katuri teaches controlling the second distance and the Amin’s teaching of adjusting the broom position is combined with Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva to teach the control of the second distance while adjusting the broom position as the broom wears out.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva to provide the broom wear adapting controller as taught by Amin so that the position of the broom is maintained a few inches above ground for effective sweeping (Amin ¶ 0020).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra in view of Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Erko et al. (US 2003/0093166, hereinafter Erko).
Regarding claim 8, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the controller is electronic (Borra, ¶ 0040, controllers are coupled to an electrical system, a traction system, and engine operation. Thus, the controller is electronic), but does not disclose a CAN-bus is used for control.
Erko teaches, in a control system field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, a CAN-bus is used for control (¶ 0039, an information system utilizes CAN-bus for controlling).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva to provide the CAN-bus as taught by Erko. It is a standardized industrial protocol for electrical communication for effective data analysis (Erko ¶ 0039).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra in view of Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Lee (KR 20070109355A).
Regarding claim 10, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the controller is adapted to maintain the second distance between the broom system and side of the road (Lindau, p. 5:37-50, 6:23-25 and fig. 5, as discussed in claim 1 above, Lindau teaches the sweeper identifies the side of the road and controls the distance between the broom system and the side of the road), but does not disclose explicitly the distance is maintained at a constant value within a predetermined limit.
Lee teaches, in an analogous cleaning machine field of endeavor, a controller of a cleaning machine is adapted to maintain the distance at a constant value within a predetermined limit (Lee English translation, p. 7:15-33, a controller of a cleaner maintains a predetermined distance between a side brush and a surface to be cleaned. Although Lee teaches the distance between the brush and a bottom surface instead of the side of the road, it teaches the controller of the cleaner can adjust the position of the broom with respect to an object to be cleaned).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva to provide the controller to maintain the second distance at a constant value within a predetermined limit as taught by Lee so that only the brush touches the surface to be cleaned and no other structure of the cleaner touches the surface in order to prevent damage or wear of the structures other than the brush (Lee English translation, p. 7:32-35).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra in view of Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Wu et al. (CN 105291987A, hereinafter Wu).
Regarding claim 11, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the cleaning machine comprises the 3D-camera (Lindau, fig. 8 and p. 11:11-12, the sweeper 100 has a pair of stereo cameras 132 [correspond to the recited 3D camera]), but does not disclose a spatial orientation of the camera is adaptable, and adaptable to be in a height position providing images of the side of the road.
Wu teaches, in a vehicle camera field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, a spatial orientation of the camera is adaptable, and adaptable to be in a height position providing images of the side of the road (Wu English translation, p. 3:25-29, a vehicle includes a camera for collecting video images; p. 4:8-12, the vehicle further includes a camera movement device for changing viewing height and orientation of the camera. Thus, the Wu’s device can be configured to provide images of the side of the road).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva to provide the orientation adaptable camera as taught by Wu so that better view is provided for a vehicle to drive safely (Wu English translation, p. 6:1-4).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra in view of Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Glubrecht et al. (WO 2018191621A1, hereinafter Glubrecht).
Regarding claim 12, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein brooms of the broom system are adapted to move with respect to the cleaning-machine in a horizontal direction and vertical direction (Lindau English translation, p. 11:18-19, the broom is driven to be moved to the side and to be raised), but does not disclose brooms are adapted to sweep debris and dirt to a suction point, and wherein the cleaning machine comprises a suction system for up-taking debris and dirt from the suction point, connected to the suction opening a suction tube, at the other end of the suction tube a container for receiving dirt and debris, and a fan for providing suction, and wherein the cleaning machine comprises at least one ventilation opening, and an outlet, and further comprising a display.
Glubrecht teaches, in an analogous cleaning machine field of endeavor, brooms are adapted to sweep debris and dirt to a suction point (¶ 0092, the material-transfer brooms 26, 28, 30 move debris to a suction inlet 34), and wherein the cleaning machine comprises a suction system for up-taking debris and dirt from the suction point, connected to the suction opening a suction tube, at the other end of the suction tube a container for receiving dirt and debris, and a fan for providing suction, and wherein the cleaning machine comprises at least one ventilation opening, and an outlet (figs. 2, 8, 9 and ¶ 0066, 0080-81, the sweeper vehicle 20 has the suction-inlet 32 [corresponds to the recited suction opening] for suctioning the debris for eventual collection in a debris hopper 42 [corresponds to the recited container]. The suction-inlet 32 to connected to an elastomeric hose 130 [corresponds to the recited suction tube]. An air flow system comprises a centrifugal fan, an interface 108 [corresponds to the recited ventilation opening] and an opening 106 [corresponds to the recited outlet], and further comprising a display (¶ 0104, an operator can control the vehicle by using a display unit 202).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Lu, Tamas, Shen, Tsukada, and Akiva to provide the suction system as taught by Glubrecht for complete removal of the debris from the pavement.
Claims 13, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra et al. (US 2018/0360284, hereinafter Borra), in view of Lindau et al. (DE 102017117013A1, cited on 09/16/2022 IDS, hereinafter Lindau), Katuri et al. (DE 102018207260A1, hereinafter Katuri), and Shen et al. (CN 102590883A, hereinafter Shen).
Regarding claim 13, Borra discloses a cleaning machine comprising
a vehicle (fig. 1, a sweeper-scrubber 30), the vehicle comprising at least one with respect to the vehicle vertically movable broom system (¶ 0038, side brushes 68 [correspond to the recited broom system] can move vertically)
a computer or controller for vertically moving said broom system independently of the vehicle (¶ 0038, the side brushes 68 can be driven by control circuitry [corresponds to the recited controller] and move vertically. The side brushes are driven by a motor, thus the side brushes are independently operated from the vehicle), but does not disclose a pavement track system comprising a 3D camera providing 3D-images, a pattern recognition software adapted to process the 3D-images, the vehicle comprises a horizontally movable broom system, and the controller for horizontally moving the broom system independently of the vehicle wherein the computer or controller is adapted to move the broom system sideways with respect to the vehicle.
Lindau teaches, in an analogous cleaning machine filed of endeavor, a pavement track system comprising a 3D camera providing 3D-images, pattern recognition software adapted to process the 3D-images (fig. 8 and p. 11:11-12, the sweeper 100 has a pair of stereo cameras 132 [correspond to the recited 3D camera] and the cameras are connected to an image recognition technique 133; p. 4:3-5, the image system comprises a software for indicating and tracking an object),
the vehicle comprises a horizontally movable broom system, and the computer or controller for horizontally moving the broom system independently of the vehicle wherein the computer or controller is adapted to move the broom system sideways with respect to the vehicle (p. 11:18-19, a controller 182 drives a broom 182. The controller not only moves the broom 182 horizontally to a side but also raises the broom; p. 5:37-50, in response to the detection of direction change, the brooms are moved to the side).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra to provide the 3D camera, pattern recognition software, and the controller as taught by Lindau in order to sweep a ground semi-automatically with increased efficiency (Lindau English translation, p. 2:35-43).
Borra as modified by Lindau does not disclose explicitly the pattern recognition software identifies a side of a road and the controller controls a second distance between the broom system and side of the road.
However, Lindau teaches the system detects a wall and a guide line in the form of a ground mark or curb (Lindau English translation, p. 6:23-25). The side of the road can be identified as the ground mark or curb. Therefore, Lindau teaches the software identifies the side of the road. In addition, as seen in fig. 5, the sweeper moves to position the broom of the sweeper to align with the curb [corresponds to the recited side of the road] as the sweeper approaches the curb. Therefore, Lindau teaches the control of the second distance between the broom system and the side of the road.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pavement track system of Borra as modified by Lindau to identify the side of the road and the controller to control the distance as recited so that the sweeper can react to change a direction of motion appropriately and continue the effective cleaning (Lindau English translation, p. 6:25-34).
Borra as modified by Lindau still does not disclose explicitly the pattern recognition software measures a first distance from the vehicle to the side of the road.
Katuri teaches, in a vehicle manipulation field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the pattern recognition software measures a first distance from the vehicle to the side of the road (Katuri English translation, 3:1-2, the device comprises a lane width recognition system; p. 9:29-32, the device comprises a software; p. 6:12-13, a device measures a distance from a vehicle to a side to a road).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine of Borra as modified by Lindau to provide the software for measuring the distance as taught by Katuri in order to allow autonomous driving of the vehicle (Katuri English translation, p. 1:11).
Borra as modified by Lindau and Katuri further teaches a pavement track system computer program comprising a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, when the program is loaded and executed by a computer or a controller, cause the computer or controller to carry out instructions for operating a cleaning machine (Borra, ¶ 0060, a system of the floor scrubber machine is controlled by computers which include machine readable medium capable of storing, encoding, and carrying instructions to operate the machine; Lindau English translation, p. 4:3-5, the imaging systems are operated by computer programs; p. 11:18-19, a controller moves the broom to side and raises the broom),
wherein the instructions causing the computer to carry out the following steps:
loading 3D images (Lindau English translation, p. 11:11-12 and fig. 8, the sweeper 100 has a pair of stereo cameras 132 and the cameras are connected to an image recognition technique 133. Therefore, the system loads 3D images for image processing);
determining a second distance between the broom system and pavement (Katuri English translation, 3:1-2, the device comprises a lane width recognition system; p. 9:29-32, the device comprises a software; p. 6:12-13, a device measures a distance from a vehicle to a side to a road. Therefore, it can be configured to determine a distance between the broom system and the pavement); and
maintaining said second distance within predetermined limits by moving said broom system by means of the controller sideways (Lindau English translation, p. 5:37-50, in response to the detection of direction change, the control unit actuate the vehicle having the brooms steering to the side in the direction of the detected change, thus the distance between the brooms and to a side of the steering direction is controlled; p. 2:13-15, a vacuum cleaner follows an operator at a predetermined distance. Therefore, Lindau teaches the cleaning machine can maintain the distance at a predetermined constant value), but still does not disclose the instructions include identifying a pavement.
Shen teaches, in the image processing field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the instructions include identifying a pavement. (Shen English translation, ¶ 0031, a software of a monitoring center automatically identifies pavement of a road surface).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning machine operation method of Borra as modified by Lindau and Katuri to provide the instruction of identifying the pavement as taught by Shen. It identifies foreign matter on the road surface for removal in order to eliminate dangerous objects from the road surface (Shen English translation ¶ 0031).
Regarding claim 17, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, and Shen teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the cleaning machine is a motor vehicle (Borra, ¶ 0062, the sweeper-scrubber 30 is powered by a drive motor to drive wheels).
Regarding claim 18, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, and Shen teaches the cleaning machine as in the rejection of claim 17, further comprising a cab within which the driver steers the cleaning machine while onboard the cleaning machine (Borra, fig. 1 and ¶ 0033, the sweeper-scrubber 30 comprises the driver seat 50 and the steering wheel 48 for a driver to onboard and steer the cleaning machine).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borra in view of Lindau, Katuri, and Shen, as applied to claim 13 above, and in further view of Hudson (WO 2019092445A1), Amin, and Lu.
Regarding claim 14, Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, and Shen discloses the pavement track system computer program comprising a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions as in the rejection of claim 13, further comprising instructions for recognition of a curb (Lindau English translation, p. 10:8-10, the sweeper 100 detects the presence of a curb), but does not disclose the instructions for neglecting the dirt and debris to be removed visible in the image.
Hudson teaches, in an image processing field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the instructions for neglecting the dirt and debris to be removed visible in the image (p. 1:6-8, an image processing method includes selectively identifying and replacing portions of the image to remove objects visible in the image. Therefore, the method of Hudson can be configured to process the dirt and debris in the image as recited).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the image processing instructions of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, and Shen to provide the instructions of neglecting the dirt and debris as taught by Hudson so that undesirable elements can be removed from the image for aesthetic purpose by showing only desirable elements (Hudson, p. 1:22-23).
Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Shen, and Hudson does not disclose the instructions include compensating for broom-wear.
Amin teaches, in the analogous cleaning machine field of endeavor, the instructions include compensating for broom-wear (¶ 0020, a broom controller adjusts a broom position in response to broom wear).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pavement track system of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Shen, and Hudson to provide the broom wear compensation as taught by Amin so that the broom is maintained at proper position.
Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Shen, Hudson, and Amin does not disclose the instructions include adapting for difficult image situations.
Lu teaches, in an image processing field of endeavor, the instructions include adapting for difficult image situations. (Lu English translation, ¶ 0107, a MATLAB® software performs image processing functions including contrast enhancement to improve image quality).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pavement track system of Borra as modified by Lindau, Katuri, Shen, Hudson, and Amin to provide the adaptation of difficult images as taught by Lu for effective data visualization (Lu ¶ 0107).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The referred arguments are the arguments listed in the Pre-Appeal Brief Request submitted on 01/29/2026. The arguments regarding the Final Office action dated on 08/29/2025 were answered in the Advisory Action dated on 12/01/2025.
Applicant argues the cited references do not teach the active control of the second distance via horizontal broom motion. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The semiautonomous follower device of Lindau comprises a pair of stereo cameras for image recognition and tracking an object so that a control unit detects a ground mark and sweeps a surface along a sidewall by moving a broom to the side (Lindau English translation, p. 4:3-5, 5:37-50, 6:23-25, and 11:11-12). The controller drives the broom to move to the side and to raise. (Lindau English translation, p. 11:18-19). Thus, the street sweeper of Lindau controls the second distance via horizontal broom motion. Recognition of a ground curb and sweeping along the curb without a user’s manual operation is the active control of the second distance.
Applicant argues the cited references do not disclose the claimed image-processing sequence. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Katuri teaches a lane width recognition system for measuring distance from a vehicle to a side of a road. Lu teaches a road sweeper comprises an image acquisition device and a software for performing image processing including contrast enhancement. Tamas teaches a software for processing graphical contents applies shadow effects in masking the graphical contents. Shen teaches a software is capable of identifying pavement of a road surface during identification of a foreign object on the surface. Tsukada teaches a travel path detection apparatus capable of detecting a rising edge. Akiva teaches analysis of two consecutive images. Therefore, all of the listed references can be combined with Borra and Lindau to teach the recited image-processing sequence.
Applicant argues Borra is non-analogous art because it discloses an indoor floor scrubbing machine, instead of an outdoor cleaning machine. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
It is not reasonable to assert that Borra’s cleaning machine comprising a broom system is not pertinent to the inventor’s problem. It is the same as asserting that the cleaning machine of instant application is not useful for cleaning other than a road, a pavement, and a gutter because the cleaning machine is only intended to be used for one of the listed three scenarios in claim 1. Borra discloses a surface cleaning vehicle including a broom system. It is capable of cleaning a road, a pavement, or a gutter. Therefore, Borra is the analogous art to the instant application.
Applicant argues the rationale to combine the references are inappropriate. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Lindau teaches the control of the cleaning machine with respect to a road. Lindau and other cited references teach the image processing. They are cited because the instant application claims the cleaning machine comprising software and apparatus for the image processing. Therefore, the cited references are combined with the floor cleaning machine of Borra to teach the road side recognition and the control of the cleaning machine.
Regarding the 112(b) rejection, the rejection was invoked because the amended claim added the term “actively controlled” while the claim limitations are the same as previous claim limitations. Applicant argues Lindau’s broom system is passively controlled. However, Lindau’s system is a semiautonomous cleaner such that it actively moves the broom to the side while the cleaner follows an operator. This is similar to the instant application that while a drive drives the cleaning machine, the broom system is controlled.
Applicant argues there are claim elements not accounted for in the rejections of record. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant asserts the claim limitation “a controller adapted to horizontally move the broom system sideways … such that a second distance … is actively controlled” is not addressed. However, Borra teaches the controller moves the broom system (¶ 0038) and Lindau teaches moving the cleaner and moving the broom sideways (Lindau English translation, p. 4:3-5, 5:37-50, 6:23-25, 11:11-12, 11:18-19).
Applicant asserts the claim limitations that software trained for recognizing the pavement and the steps of adapting and correcting for contrast, shadow effects as an integrated process are not addressed. However, Shen teaches a software which automatically identifies pavement of a road surface (Shen English translation, ¶ 0031), Lu teaches an image acquisition device of a road sweeper includes a software performing contrast enhancement function (Lu English translation, abstract, ¶ 0107), and Tamas teaches a software for processing shadow effects in graphical contents (¶ 0105).
Applicant asserts the rising-edge validation and the at least two consecutive 3D-images are not addressed. However, Tsukada teaches an edge detection unit of a vehicle detects a rising edge, and Akiva teaches image analysis for object identification involves analysis of two consecutive images (¶ 0006, 0017).
Applicant asserts maintaining the second distance within predetermined limit is not addressed. However, Lee teaches a controller of a cleaner maintains a predetermined distance between a side brush and a surface to be cleaned (Lee English translation, p. 7:15-33).
The above references are combined to teach the problem addressed by the instant application.
Finally, in response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See MPEP 2145(X)(A).
For the reasons above, the cited references teach the recited claim limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yoon (KR 101997911B1) discloses a floor sweeper having a brush unit wherein a control unit changes a distance between the sweeper and a side wall.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUKWOO JAMES CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00a-5:00p.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/SUKWOO JAMES CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights