DETAILED ACTION
This is a Final office action on the merits for application number 17/942,079. Claims 4-5, 8-10, 14-15 and 23 were not selected and withdrawn by the Applicant based on the Office’s Requirement for Restriction dated 12/3/2024. Claims 1, 11, 12, 21, 22 and 24 are amended. No claims were cancelled. Claim 27 is newly added. Claims 1-3, 6-7, 11-13, 16-22 and 24-27 are pending and have been examined on the merits.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Regarding 35 USC 101:
Examiner finds Applicant’s arguments to be persuasive. Examiner finds that although claim 1 recites abstract data about robots and robot attachments, the configuration function and the deploying function integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, the rejection is withdrawn.
Regarding 35 USC 112:
The rejection under 35 USC 112 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments.
Regarding 35 USC 102/103:
Applicant asserts on page 11-12 that Mattingly does not teach the newly added: wherein provisioning the component to at least one multi-purpose robot of the one or more multi-purpose robots causes the set of extended capabilities of the component to be added to the set of baseline features of the at least one multi-purpose robot or the newly added: provision at least one component of the components inventory to at least one assigned multi-purpose robot of the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots to add the set of extended capabilities of the at least one component to the set of baseline features of the at least one assigned multi-purpose robot. Examiner agrees and, as necessitated by amendment and discussed in the 35 USC 103 rejection, infra, Examiner now asserts that Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches these elements.
Applicant asserts on page 12, bottom, to page 14, that the art of record does not teach the newly added: one or more processors collectively… provision at least one component of the components inventory to at least one assigned multi-purpose robot of the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots to add the set of extended capabilities of the at least one component to the set of baseline features of the at least one assigned multi-purpose robot because, because as Applicant asserts on page 13, bottom, Duffy teaches “the master device needs human intervention to carry out the desired task”. Examiner disagrees. Duffy does teach that a computer can perform the component provisioning task (see at least [0210] “Block 902 illustrates a main robot 102 connecting to a first modular attachment using the connection interface 214. According to at least one non-limiting exemplary embodiment, the main robot 102 may determine the first modular attachment to use to accomplish a first set of tasks, as illustrated in block 904, based on (1) a user input, (2) instructions stored in a memory, (3) instructions communicated by an external server, and/or (4) prior use of the first modular attachment to accomplish tasks of the first task set”). (Examiner has added numbering to clarify that these are alternative ways that the robot can be provisioned with attachments). Duffy teaches four alternative ways for the computer to provision an attachment and only one of them involves a human, the other three – instructions stored in a memory, instructions stored in a server and prior use of an attachment for a task – do not require a human. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. The rejection is maintained.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The 35 USC 101 rejection is withdrawn. Examiner finds that although claim 1 recites abstract data about robots and robot attachments, the configuration function and the deploying function integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, the rejection is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112b
The rejection under 35 USC 112 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 11, 13, 16-17, and 25-26 are rejected under U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0025818 (Mattingly) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0248007 (Duffy).
Regarding Claim 1:
Mattingly teaches a system that manages swarms of autonomous vehicles in the accomplishment of jobs. Mattingly teaches: (Currently Amended) A robot fleet management platform, comprising: a computer-readable storage system that stores a resources data store that maintains: a robot inventory that indicates a plurality of robots that can be assigned to a robot fleet, and for each respective robot, a set of baseline features of the robot and a respective status of the robot, ([0021] “The server system 130 may comprise a memory storage device accessible by the autonomous vehicles 120. In some embodiments, the server system 130 may store at least a portion of a hash chain database used for managing the autonomous vehicles 120 in the system 100. In some embodiments, the server system 130 may store vehicles statuses and task assignments associated with one or more autonomous vehicles 120 in the system 100” and see [0024]).
wherein the robot inventory of robots includes a plurality of multi-purpose robots that can be configured for different tasks and different environments; ([0060] “vehicle capability and current status information may be stored in a hash chain database” and [0018] “the system 100 may comprise one or more unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), unmanned ground vehicles (UGV), unmanned watercraft, self-driving vehicles, passenger vehicles, cargo vehicles, etc”).
and a set of one or more processors that execute a set of computer-readable instructions, [0041] “the steps shown in FIG. 4 may be performed by a processor-based device such as one or more of the autonomous vehicle 120 and the server system 130 described with reference to FIG. 1, and the autonomous vehicle 220 described with reference to FIG. 2 herein or similar devices. In some embodiments, the steps may be performed by one or more of a processor of an autonomous vehicle, an unmanned vehicle, a processor of a central computer system, and/or a processor device of a server system”).
wherein the set of one or more processors collectively: receive a request for a robotic fleet to perform a job; ([0030] “In step 301, the system retrieves tasks from a hash chain database”.
determine a job definition data structure based on the request, the job definition data structure defining a set of tasks that are to be performed in performance of the job; ([0033] “the steps shown in FIG. 4 may be performed by a processor-based device such as one or more of the autonomous vehicle 120 and the server system 130 described with reference to FIG. 1, and the autonomous vehicle 220 described with reference to FIG. 2 herein or similar devices. In some embodiments, the steps may be performed by one or more of a processor of an autonomous vehicle, an unmanned vehicle, a processor of a central computer system, and/or a processor device of a server system”).
determine a robot fleet configuration data structure corresponding to the job based on the set of tasks and the robot inventory, ([0032] “the hash chain database comprises a blockchain in which each block corresponds to one or more vehicle tasks”).
wherein the robot fleet configuration data structure assigns a plurality of robots selected from the robot inventory to the set of tasks defined in the job definition data structure and the plurality of robots includes one or more assigned multi- purpose robots; …determine a respective configuration for each respective assigned multi-purpose robot based on the respective task that is assigned to the assigned multi-purpose robot… the components inventory; configure the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots based on the respective configurations; and deploy the robotic fleet to perform the job. ([0031] “an autonomous vehicle fleet may refer to a swarm of vehicles, a group of vehicles traveling together, a group of vehicles operating under a shared task agreement, and/or a group of geographically distributed vehicles. …task parameters may comprise information on how to perform a task such as a task identifier, a destination, a default path, cargo to be carried, cargo weight, data to be collected, path restrictions, task performance history, and the like. In some embodiments, task parameters may comprise vehicle requirements and/or preferences for the task such as vehicle hardware capability, vehicle processing capability, vehicle load capacity, vehicle speed, vehicle range, vehicle type (e.g. UAV vs. UGV), onboard sensors, etc.”).
While Mattingly teaches a fleet of autonomous vehicles that have attributes and capabilities that are tracked and can be modified based on the task (selection of sensors, empty or full tank of gasoline, empty or full battery charge, etc.) (see at least [0060] and [0027]), Mattingly does not specifically teach: and a components inventory that indicates different components that can be provisioned to one or more multi-purpose robots, and for each component, a respective set of extended capabilities corresponding to the component and a respective status of the component, wherein provisioning the component to at least one multi-purpose robot of the one or more multi-purpose robots causes the set of extended capabilities of the component to be added to the set of baseline features of the at least one multi-purpose robot. Duffy, in the same field of art teaches this: ([0214] “a robotic system may comprise a base device including a port for receiving at least one extension; and at least one processor… The at least one processor is further configured to change characteristics of the base device from a first characteristic to a different second characteristic based on the at least one extension received by the port. For example, the first characteristic may correspond to floor mopping and the second characteristic may correspond to vacuum cleaning” and [see Fig 13 and Fig 14] and [0157] “map may comprise locations of each of the plurality of modular attachments”).
provision at least one component of the components inventory to at least one assigned multi-purpose robot of the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots to add the set of extended capabilities of the at least one component to the set of baseline features of the at least one assigned multi-purpose robot… (determine configuration for robot) and the at least one component… that has been provisioned to the assigned multi-purpose robot (based on the respective task assigned). (see at least [0210] “Block 902 illustrates a main robot 102 connecting to a first modular attachment using the connection interface 214. According to at least one non-limiting exemplary embodiment, the main robot 102 may determine the first modular attachment to use to accomplish a first set of tasks, as illustrated in block 904, based on (1) a user input, (2) instructions stored in a memory, (3) instructions communicated by an external server, and/or (4) prior use of the first modular attachment to accomplish tasks of the first task set”). (Examiner has added numbering to clarify that these are alternative ways that the robot can be provisioned with attachments) and also see [0214], Figs 13 and 14, and [0103] “module changing station system may comprise a non-transitory computer readable memory comprising a plurality of instructions embodied thereon and a specialized processor configured to execute the instructions to: detect a presence of a robot within a dock of the module changing station system, detach a current module from the robot, determine a desired module to be utilized by the robot to perform a task, and attach the desired module to the robot”). (Examiner emphasis)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach and remove detachable components/tools/sensors, such as those taught by Duffy, on multifunctional autonomous devices, such as those taught by Mattingly to improve the functionality of each multifunctional autonomous device by predictably provide additional functionality by the use of detachable components/tools/sensors. Examiner is using Duffy to teach a base unit with detachable components wherein the system knows the functionalities of all of the combinations of base unit and components and can select a particular combination for a particular required function, and Examiner is using Mattingly to teach a system that can organize a fleet of base unit/component combinations to work together to perform a task based on the combination of functionalities.
Regarding Claims 2 and 6:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly also teaches: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein the robot inventory includes special purpose robots. (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein the robot inventory includes special purpose robots and to determine the robot fleet configuration data structure is further based on an available inventory of the special purpose robots. ([0036] “faster but noisier UAV may hand off a delivery task to a quieter but slower UAV when approaching a residential area”).
Regarding Claims 3, 7 and 16:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly also teaches: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein determining the robot fleet configuration data structure is further based on an environment of the job… (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein determining a respective configuration for each respective assigned multi-purpose robot is further based on an environment of the job. (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein configuring the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots is based on one or more characteristics of a target operating environment. ([0060] rank candidate vehicles based on the requirements and/or preferences of the task and the capabilities and/or statuses of the candidate vehicles” and [0036] “the task transfer condition is determined based on one or more of other assigned tasks, fuel level, vehicle condition, vehicle location, vehicle capability, weather condition, and task requirements. In some embodiments, task transfer condition may comprise conditions relating to the status of the vehicle assigned to perform the task, environmental conditions, and/or conditions associated with the availability of transferee vehicles” and [0036] “faster but noisier UAV may hand off a delivery task to a quieter but slower UAV when approaching a residential area”).
Regarding Claim 11:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly also teaches: (Currently Amended) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein configuring the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots includes configuring a robot module that includes one or more of a software robot module or a hardware robot module. ([0034] “the task may be performed by one or more of a locomotion, navigation, sensor, and data processing system of the first autonomous vehicle… step 330 may be determined based on one or more of the vehicles' other assigned tasks, location, hardware capability, processing capability, load capacity, top speed, fuel range, vehicle type (e.g. UAV vs. UGV), onboard sensors, etc. In some embodiments, the system checks the requirements of the task in the task parameters and determine whether it can carry out at least a portion of the task…step 330 may comprise determining whether another vehicle in the fleet is more suitable for performing the task. In some embodiments, steps 330 and 350 may be combined and the system may determine that a vehicle should not perform a task because task transfer condition exists”).
Regarding Claim 12:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claims 1 and 11. Mattingly does not specifically teach: (Currently Amended) The robot fleet management platform of claim 11, wherein the robot module is an interchangeable module. Duffy, in the same field of art teaches this: ([0264] “the drive unit and the control module comprise separable modules, so that for example, either the drive unit and/or control module can be replaced in the robotic device”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve the system taught by Mattingly by adding interchangeable hardware modules, as taught by Duffy, because of the predictable improvement in system maintenance due to fewer parts to maintain as suggested in Duffy (see at least [0004]).
Regarding Claim 13:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly also teaches: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein configuring the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots task includes accessing a robot module system via at least one of a physical interface module and a control interface module. ([0020] “The network 110 may generally comprise wireless connections that allow the autonomous vehicle 120 in the system 100 to communicate with one or more other vehicles in the system and/or with the server system 130. In some embodiments, the network 110 may comprise a wireless local area network (WLAN) such as one or more of a Wi-Fi network, a Wi-Fi direct network, a Bluetooth network, an ad hoc network, a peer-to-peer network, a wireless distribution system, and the like”).
Regarding Claim 17:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly also teaches: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 16, wherein a target operating environment is one or more of land-based, sea-based, submerged, in-flight, subterranean, and below-freezing ambient temperature. ([0019] “the system 100 may comprise one or more unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), unmanned ground vehicles (UGV), unmanned watercraft, self-driving vehicles, passenger vehicles, cargo vehicles, etc.”).
Regarding Claims 21, 22 and 24:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claims 1 and 11. Mattingly does not specifically teach: (Currently Amended) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein provisioning at least one component of the components inventory to at least one assigned multi- purpose robot includes provisioning one or more components identified in a job execution plan to the at least one assigned multi-purpose robot. (Currently Amended) The robot fleet management platform of claim 21, wherein the at least one component is a hardware component. (Currently Amended) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein provisioning at least one component of the components inventory to at least one assigned multi- purpose robot includes provisioning one or more of appendages, sensor sets, chipsets, and motive adaptors to the multi-purpose robot based on at least one task in a set of target tasks for the robot that are identified in a job execution plan. Duffy, in the same field of art teaches this: ([0036] “A sweeper module may configure the robot as a sweeper by replacing or converting the mower module”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve the system taught by Mattingly by adding interchangeable hardware modules, as taught by Duffy, because of the predictable improvement in system maintenance due to fewer parts to maintain as suggested in Duffy (see at least [0004]).
Regarding Claim 25:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly also teaches: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein configuring the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots includes analyzing a job execution plan that defines a fleet of robots and configuring at least one multi-purpose robot of the fleet of robots. ([0060] “tasks may comprise capability requirements and/or preferences. In some embodiments, one or more vehicles may rank candidate vehicles based on the requirements and/or preferences of the task and the capabilities and/or statuses of the candidate vehicles” and [0021] “the server system 130 may store at least a portion of a hash chain database used for managing the autonomous vehicles 120 in the system 100. In some embodiments, the server system 130 may store vehicles statuses and task assignments associated with one or more autonomous vehicles 120 in the system 100. In some embodiments, the server system 130 may comprise a control circuit for updating the hash chain database and/or for providing information/instructions to one or more of the autonomous vehicles 120”).
Regarding Claim 26:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly also teaches: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein configuring the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots includes provisioning a local manager capability that enables the multi-purpose robot to control one or more robots. ([0017] “the autonomous vehicle fleet comprises a master autonomous vehicle configured to coordinate tasks assigned to vehicles in the autonomous vehicle fleet”).
Regarding Claim 27:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Mattingly does not specifically teach: (New) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein, at least one task assigned to a selected assigned multi-purpose robot of the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots exceeds the set of baseline features of the selected assigned multi-purpose robot, and provisioning the at least one component of the components inventory to the selected assigned multi-purpose robot to add the set of extended capabilities of the at least one component to the set of baseline features of the selected assigned multi-purpose robot enables the selected assigned multi-purpose robot to perform the at least one task. Duffy teaches this: ([0214] “a robotic system may comprise a base device including a port for receiving at least one extension; and at least one processor… The at least one processor is further configured to change characteristics of the base device from a first characteristic to a different second characteristic based on the at least one extension received by the port. For example, the first characteristic may correspond to floor mopping and the second characteristic may correspond to vacuum cleaning” and [see Fig 13 and Fig 14] and [0157] “map may comprise locations of each of the plurality of modular attachments”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach and remove detachable components/tools/sensors, such as those taught by Duffy, on multifunctional autonomous devices, such as those taught by Mattingly to improve the functionality of each multifunctional autonomous device by predictably provide additional functionality by the use of detachable components/tools/sensors.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0025818 (Mattingly) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0248007 (Duffy) in view of U.S. Patent 9,492,922 (Johnson).
Regarding Claims 18 and 19:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. While Mattingly also teaches robots are powered by on-board batteries (see at least [0067] “role may be assigned based on battery level”), Mattingly does not specifically teach a second power source. Mattingly does not teach: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein configuring the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots includes configuring an energy storage and power distribution system to utilize two or more distinct power sources based on an aspect of one of a task and an operating environment. (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 18, wherein a first distinct power source of the two or more distinct power sources is a mobile power source of the multi-purpose robot and a second distinct power source of the two or more distinct power sources is a fixed position power source that provides power to the robot via a wireless power signal. Johnson in the same field of art teaches robots powered by on-board batteries and also teaches a second distinct power source that provides power via a wireless system: (see at least [Column 11, lines 4-14] “Additionally, or alternatively, the charging port(s) 360 may include a charging pad, or other suitable wireless power transfer device, capable of wirelessly transferring electrical power from the power source(s) 370 to a battery located on an electronic device (e.g., via capacitive couplers, via electromagnetic inductive couplers, via inductive couplers, etc.). Thus, the battery located on the electronic device may be charged merely by being located within a threshold proximity of the charging port(s) 360”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the wireless power system taught by Johnson to improve the system taught by Mattingly due to the predictable improvement in robot availability by not having to return robots to a particular location for re-charging.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0025818 (Mattingly) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0248007 (Duffy) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0247776 (Faye).
Regarding Claim 20:
Mattingly in view of Duffy teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. While Mattingly teaches robots with a locomotion function that include ([0019] “unmanned ground vehicles” and “self-driving vehicles”), Mattingly does not specifically teach: (Original) The robot fleet management platform of claim 1, wherein configuring the one or more assigned multi-purpose robots includes configuring a propulsion system of the robot to adaptably utilize one or more legs for locomotion. Faye in the same field of art, teaches a robot fleet with some robots with legs: ([0005] “a robot having 6 legs”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use robots with legs, as taught by Faye, in the robot management system taught by Mattingly due to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
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 KIMBERLY S BURSUM whose telephone number is (571)272-8213. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Florian (Ryan) m Zeender can be reached on 571-272-6790. 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.
/KIMBERLY S. BURSUM/Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FLORIAN M ZEENDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627