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
This is a non-final Office Action on the merits in response to communications filed by Applicant on May 08, 2026. Claims 1-50 are currently pending and examined below.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
In respond to applicant's arguments based on the filed amendment with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of said previous office action have been fully considered; however,, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made. Furthermore, the indicated allowable subject matter is withdrawn since the filed amendment is significantly changes the scope of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghanem et al. US2021/0042665 (“Ghanem”) in view of Kim et al. US2020/0016759 (“Kim”).
Regarding claim(s) 1, 13. Ghanem discloses a method of robotic assembly of parts, the method comprising:
obtaining a target arrangement of the parts of the assembly, wherein the target arrangement includes a first target position of a first part, a second target position of a second part, (para. 99-105, The workpiece table 259 may comprise a list of parts 236, such as by part identifier, required to create a finished subassembly or assembly 220. The assembly table 257 may comprise a list of subassemblies or assemblies 220, such as by assembly identifier or subassembly identifier, actually or planned to be created by the system 210.);
robotically joining the first part and the second part based on the first target position and the second target position in the target arrangement to obtain a first subassembly of the assembly, the first subassembly having a first physical arrangement, wherein the first physical arrangement includes the physical arrangement of the first and second parts after joining (para. 67, para. 77-79, FIG. 10 illustrate the joining robots 14 beginning a weld. The joining robot 14 may be configured to begin a weld at a datum 40 and travel a specified distance in a specified direction, though such is not required. For example, without limitation, the joining robot 14 may be configured to instead begin a weld a specified distance in a specified direction from a datum 40. Any type of welding is contemplated such as, but not limited to, shielded metal arc welding, gas metal arc welding, flux cored arc welding, gas tungsten inert gas welding, some combination thereof, or the like. The weld may be made over a distance or spot welding may be provided. While welding is discussed, other forms of joining the parts 26 are contemplated such as );
fitting the first physical arrangement to the target arrangement to obtain a fitted first physical arrangement; and robotically joining the first subassembly and the third part, wherein the first subassembly is arranged in the fitted first physical arrangement, and the third part is arranged in the third target position in the target arrangement (para. 67, 97-100 fig. 7, 9, FIG. 9 illustrates the machine vision system 12 locating the various datums 40. The machine vision system 12 may comprise executable software instructions stored on one or more electronic storage devices which when executed by one or more processors configure the machine vision system 12 to check for alignment of the various parts 26 of the subassembly 20. If further alignment is needed, the controller 30 may send appropriate instructions to the material handling robots 16. Another alignment scan may be performed to re-check alignment. When no further alignment is needed, the controller 30 may direct the joining robots 14 to begin joining the parts 26.).
Ghanem does not explicitly disclose: determining a future correction of the first subassembly based on a tolerance between the first subassembly and a future subassembly.
Kim teaches another robotic assembling system and method that determining a future correction of the first subassembly based on a tolerance between the first subassembly and a future subassembly ([0011] compares and analyzes location coordinates of a correction tool of a hanger robot recognized in a vision coordinate system and a component restricted by a hanger, and applies a correction value for a difference value between the location coordinates of the correction tool and the component to a robot coordinate system and corrects a robot coordinate system based on the component in the vision coordinate system, thereby minimizing a component restriction error according to repeated behavior of the robot. [0036-0037] the vision coordinate system recognized through the camera of the vision unit and a spacing coordinate value are compared and analyzed, so that it is possible to predict and determine interference between the components and assemble the components in the state of avoiding interference between the components through the correction of the locations of the components.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method of Ghanem with Kim’s teaching above to improve assembly accuracy and tight tolerance control. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim(s) 2 14. Ghanem discloses wherein the target arrangement further includes a fourth target position of a fourth part, and robotically joining the first subassembly and the third part obtains a second subassembly of the assembly, the second subassembly having a second physical arrangement, wherein the second physical arrangement includes the physical arrangement of the first, second, and third parts after joining, the method further comprising: fitting the second physical arrangement to the target arrangement to obtain a fitted second physical arrangement; and robotically joining the second subassembly and the fourth part, wherein the second subassembly is arranged in the fitted second physical arrangement, and the fourth part is arranged in the fourth target position in the target arrangement (para. 79-100, ] FIG. 19 illustrates an exemplary system 210 for pickup up and placement of parts 236 to form assemblies or subassemblies 220. The same or similar components may be numbered similarly but increased by multiples of 100 (e.g., 12 to 120, 220, etc.). The pickup and placement system 210 may comprise a controllr 230. The controller 230 may comprise one or more subcomponents, engines, routines, algorithms, electronic storage devices, processors, combinations thereof, or the like including but not limited to, a learning software module 231, a manipulator motion control engine 233, and/or a power motion controller 235.).
Regarding claim(s) 3, 15. Ghanem in view of Kim further teaches wherein fitting the first physical arrangement to the target arrangement includes performing the best-fit a correction (Kim: [0011] applies a correction value for a difference value between the location coordinates of the correction tool and the component to a robot coordinate system and corrects a robot coordinate system based on the component in the vision coordinate system,).
Regarding claim(s) 4, 16. Ghanem discloses wherein performing the best-fit correction includes determining a difference in position between each of a plurality of corresponding pairs of same features of the first physical arrangement and the target arrangement, and minimizing an error based on the differences in position (para. 79-82, The joining robots 14 may join the parts 26 to create the subassembly 20. The material handling device 32 may be removed and the machine vision system 12 may perform an inspection scan the now joined subassembly 20. The learning A.I. software may execute a learning model. The learning model may compare the location of the datums 40 from the inspection scan against the expected position of the datums 40. The expected position of the datums 40 may be provided by the prior alignment scan(s), the stored virtual datums 40 for the subassembly 20, and/or inspection scans of previous subassemblies 20.).
Regarding claim(s) 5, 17. Ghanem discloses wherein minimizing the error includes minimizing a sum of the squares of the differences of position (para. 79-82, para. 126, Relatively higher weighted target points 240 may be prioritized. For example, without limitation, while the solution having the overall shortest length summed vectors may be desired (reflecting overall lowest amount of movement), a slightly longer overall length summed vectors solution may instead be selected where the vector associated with the relatively highest weight is the shortest compared to other potential solutions. In this way, relatively close tolerance parts (which may be assigned higher weights)).
Regarding claim(s) 6, 18. Ghanem discloses wherein fitting the first physical arrangement to the target arrangement includes determining a difference between a first join position of the first part and a first target join position of the first part, and determining a second target join position at which to join the third part with the first part based on the difference (para. 79 -para. 100, The expected position of the datums 40 may be provided by the prior alignment scan(s), the stored virtual datums 40 for the subassembly 20, and/or inspection scans of previous subassemblies 20. The learning model may be configured to compensate for any differences by updating the virtual datums 40 to compensate for such differences. Such differences may arise from, for example without limitation, weld spring back, gravity, deflection, compliance, torqueing, riveting, some combination thereof, or the like. Such corrections may be performed by machine learning A.I. software. ).
Regarding claim(s) 7, 19. Ghanem discloses determining a set of parts associated with the assembly, wherein the set of parts includes the first part, the second part, and the third part; determining dimensional information of each of the first, second, and third parts, and determining the target arrangement based on the dimensional information (para. 79 -para. 122, The workpiece table 259 may comprise a list of parts 236, such as by part identifier, required to create a finished subassembly or assembly 220. The assembly table 257 may comprise a list of subassemblies or assemblies 220, such as by assembly identifier or subassembly identifier, actually or planned to be created by the system 210. The target point table 261 may comprise one or more target points 240 for each part 236. Such target points 240 may include, but are not necessarily limited to, target points 240 for the first location 239 and/or the second location 241.)
Regarding claim(s) 8, 20. Ghanem discloses determining, prior to joining the first subassembly and the third part, an interference between the first subassembly and the third part; and adjusting the fitted first physical arrangement if the interference exceeds a threshold (para. 79 -para. 100, para. 125-para. 126, The controller 230 may be configured to initially populate the target point table 261 with actual measurement data which may be obtained using the machine vision system 212. Scans may be made of one or more parts 236 and/or final locations for such parts to provide said actual target points 240. In exemplary embodiments, such target points 240 may comprise coordinates for actual or virtual datums on the part(s) 236 such as but not limited to points, edges, holes, surface features, combinations thereof, or the like.).
Regarding claim(s) 9, 21. Ghanem discloses wherein the interference includes a portion of the first subassembly contacting a portion of the third part (para. 125-para. 127, Interfacing—allowing interfacing and avoiding interference between various pairs of agents during manufacturing operations. The following types of interfacing are provided by way of non-limiting example: part-to-part (avoid gripping elements 250 from getting in between parts 236 joined); and part-to-tool (avoid gripping elements 250 from obstructing access of the joining robots 214).).
Regarding claim(s) 10, 22. Ghanem discloses wherein the interference is determined further based on a tolerance of a joint between the third part and the first part (para. 125-para. 126, a slightly longer overall length summed vectors solution may instead be selected where the vector associated with the relatively highest weight is the shortest compared to other potential solutions. In this way, relatively close tolerance parts (which may be assigned higher weights) may be made more likely to stay in tolerance by permitting less shifting between their actual position and their desired position. Likewise, relatively loose tolerance parts (which may be assigned lower weights) may be permitted greater latitude in shifting, as such movement is unlikely to result in an out of tolerance article 220.).
Regarding claim(s) 11, 23. Ghanem discloses measuring a first part position of the first part and a second part position of the second part based on a set of key product characteristics associated with the first part and the second part, wherein fitting the first physical arrangement to the target arrangement is based on the first part position and the second part position (para. 03, para. 125-para. 126).
Regarding claim(s) 12, 24. Ghanem discloses wherein the key product characteristics include at least one of a tolerance associated with a joint included in the assembly, a clearance associated with the assembly, or a surface profile associated with the assembly (para, 103, para. 125-para. 126).
Regarding claim(s) 25. (Ghanem in view of Kim further teaches wherein to determine the future correction, the computing system is configured to determine the tolerance between a portion of the first subassembly and a portion of a subsequent part, wherein the future subassembly includes the subsequent part (Kim: [0023] Another exemplary embodiment of the present invention provides a method of controlling a robot system for assembling components, the method including: a first correction operation of generating three-point location coordinates in a vision coordinate system by scanning a location of a correction tool in a hanger robot according to three or more point behavior of the hanger robot by using the camera, comparing the three-point location coordinates in the vision coordinate system and corresponding three-point location coordinates in a robot coordinate system and calculating a correction value, and correcting the robot coordinate system with the correction value and matching the vision coordinate system and the robot coordinate system;).
Regarding claim(s) 26, 39. Ghanem in view of Kim further teaches wherein the computing system is further configured to adjust the fitted first physical arrangement when the tolerance exceeds a threshold (Ghanem: [0103] the several target points 240 may be prioritized in the optimization algorithm such that the target point or target points 240 that most influence the magnitude of variation in the workpiece 236 can be oriented as close as possible to their nominal, desired target point positions to thereby reduce the magnitude of variation in the article 220. For example, without limitation, some tolerances may be somewhat arbitrary and that an out-of-tolerance situation for one target point 240 does not necessarily render the article 220 defective or inoperative. However, limits may optionally be placed on the optimization algorithm 263 that would not permit the location of one or more target points 240 to be positioned at an out-of-tolerance position which could lead to no pick of the part 236.)
Regarding claim(s) 27-33, 40-44 Ghanem in view of Kim further teaches wherein the future subassembly includes one or more additional parts (Ghanem: [0009] Systems and methods for learning software assisted, fixtureless object pickup and placement are provided. A workpiece table may be stored at a controller. The workpiece table comprises a list of parts, such as by part identifier, which form an assembly. An assembly table may be stored at the controller. The assembly table comprises a list of desired assemblies, such as by assembly identifier. A target points table may be stored at the controller.).
Regarding claim(s) 34-47. Ghanem in view of Kim further teaches wherein the at least two robots are further configured to join the second subassembly and a fourth part, wherein the second subassembly is arranged in the fitted second physical arrangement, and the fourth part is arranged in a fourth target position in the target arrangement (Kim: [0025] third location coordinates of the apex of the correction tool in the vision coordinate system by analyzing the image information of the correction tool at the predetermined three-point locations of the hanger robot; receiving the first, second, and third location coordinates of the robot coordinate system for the apex of the correction tool at the predetermined three-point locations of the hanger robot from the robot controller; calculating the first correction value for difference values between first, second, and third location coordinate values in the robot coordinate system and the first, second, and third location coordinates in the vision coordinate system; and transmitting the first correction value to the robot controller, and correcting and setting the robot coordinate system to a first correction robot coordinate system).
Regarding claim(s) 48-50. Ghanem in view of Kim further teaches wherein performing the correction includes adjusting the first physical arrangement ([0023] a welding operation of welding welded parts of the one component and another component, which are matched to each other, by controlling the one or more welding robots and welding machines; and an inspection operation of comparing location coordinates in the vision coordinate system generated by scanning the product, in which the welded part is welded, by using the camera with model data coordinates in the model coordinate system and determining whether a difference between the location coordinates in the vision coordinate system and the model data coordinates is within an allowance error range, and inspecting a defect).
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUC M DO whose telephone number is (571)270-5962. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramón Mercado, Ph.D. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/TRUC M DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights