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
Applicant’s arguments, filed 02/25/2026 with respect to objections under 112(f) and rejections under 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections under 112(f) and rejections under 101 have been withdrawn.
The terminal disclaimer filed on 02/25/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of any patent granted on the Application Number 17948290 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded. The double patenting rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the combined references do not teach using a floor surface, as Sergeev teaches artificial marks instead of using floor surface geometry.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with this interpretation of "floor surface geometry." Even though Sergeev's markings are artificial marks, placed on the floor, they are still floor markings as they are on the floor. Under BRI, "floor surface geometry" would simply be interpreted as any sort of 'geometry', such as markings, on the floor, which Sergeev teaches. Thus, this argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues there is no motive to combine Sergeev and Droz as Sergeev relates to unintentional rotation, while Droz relates to intentional rotation.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Whether the rotation is intentional or unintentional doesn't affect whether Droz's rotational sensing, specifically as described in [0029] of Droz, could be used. This paragraph teaches comparing two images to determine an offset due to rotation, while Sergeev teaches determining rotational offset between a current and expected position. Both determine an offset by using sensed data, and thus there is no reason the measurement method, as taught by Droz, cannot be used in Sergeev's invention.
Applicant argues that there would be no reasonable expectation of success in combining Sergeev and Droz as Droz's rotating platform would undermine the calibration methodology of Sergeev.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Whether the rotation is intentional or unintentional doesn't affect whether Droz's rotational sensing, specifically as described in [0029] of Droz, could be used. This paragraph teaches comparing two images to determine an offset due to rotation, while Sergeev teaches determining rotational offset between a current and expected position. Both determine an offset by using sensed data, and thus there is no reason the measurement method, as taught by Droz, cannot be used in Sergeev's invention.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8-12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sergeev (US 20210239813 A1) in view of Lai (US 20210102804 A1), further in view of Droz (US 20190052844 A1).
Claim 1: Sergeev teaches an attachment orientation sensing device that senses an attachment orientation of a distance measurement device mounted on a specific thing, the attachment orientation sensing device comprising: a processor configured with a program to perform operations comprising:
operation as a distance information acquisition unit configured to acquire distance information about a distance to a reference point on a reference surface […] (Fig. 1, optoelectronic sensor 5 and [0033]-[0034]),
Operation as an angle information acquisition unit configured to acquire angle information about the angle to the reference point ([0036] – determining angular deviation and yaw and pitch angles);
and operation as an attachment orientation sensing unit configured to sense an attachment orientation of the distance measurement device with respect to the reference surface on the basis of the distance information and the angle information acquired by the distance information acquisition unit and the angle information acquisition unit ([0001] – determining angular position of optoelectronic sensor, ([0012] – describing pitch and yaw, and [0036] – determining pitch and yaw),
and a distance image generation unit configured to generate a distance image including the reference surface, on the basis of acquired distance information of the distance information acquisition unit and acquired angle information of the angle information acquisition unit ([0005] – creating sensor image and [0031] – determining distance),
wherein: the reference surface is a floor surface (Fig. 2 and [0035], measurement structures 14 on ground);
Sergeev does not teach, but Lai does teach the distance acquired according to a phase difference between a received light wave and an emitted light wave emitted from an emission unit included in the distance measurement onto the reference surface ([0024] – comparing phase).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to use the phase difference range finding, as taught by Lai, in the device as taught by Sergeev, because, as Lai teaches, this is an existing, and known, way to determine distance ([0002]). Thus, this would be a known method which would yield predictable results (as the method is well known).
Sergeev, as modified, does not teach, but Droz does teach operation as the attachment orientation sensing unit further comprises sensing a rotation of the attachment orientation of the distance measurement device based on whether a center position of a distribution of pixels at the same distance to the floor surface in the distance image acquired by the distance image generation unit is moving from a specific reference position or is stationary ([0029] – sensing alignment via sensing distortion of images and difference between expected and actual pixel locations).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to use the rotation sensing method, as taught by Droz, in the device as taught by Sergeev, as modified in view of Lai, because, by sensing rotation, the device can sense alignment of the device between positions, and thus improve data quality (See Droz [0029]-[0031]).
Claim 2: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations such that operation as the attachment orientation sensing unit further comprises sensing at least one of an inclination angle of the distance measurement device with respect to the reference surface, the distance from the reference surface, and a rotation angle with respect to the reference surface, as the attachment orientation (Sergeev [0036] – sensing pitch and yaw).
Claim 3: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations such that operation as the attachment orientation sensing unit further comprises sensing the attachment orientation by using information about the distance and the angle to two reference points on the reference surface (Sergeev [0036] and Fig. 3 – using scan points to determine angle).
Claim 5: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations such that operation as the attachment orientation sensing unit further comprises sensing the attachment orientation of the distance measurement device by using a first distance to a first reference point on the reference surface at a first pixel included in the distance image acquired by the distance image acquisition unit, and a first angle with respect to the reference surface, as well as a second distance to a second reference point on the reference surface at a second pixel that is different from the first pixel, and a second angle with respect to the reference surface (Sergeev [0036] – two scan points 17 and 18).
Claim 6: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations such that operation as the attachment orientation sensing unit further comprises sensing rotation with respect to the reference surface as the attachment orientation of the distance measurement device by using a first angle with respect to an emission axis of a light emitted from the emission unit at a first pixel included in the distance image acquired by the distance image acquisition unit, and a second angle with respect to the emission axis of the light emitted from the emission unit at a second pixel that is different from the first pixel (Sergeev [0036] – two scan points 17 and 18).
Claim 10: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations such that operation as the distance information acquisition unit further comprises acquiring the distance information and the angle information with respect to the reference point acquired at a specific sensing position (Sergeev [0034] – describing scan points 17-20, found with respect to sensor 5).
Claim 8: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1. Sergeev, as modified in view of Lai, does not teach, but Droz does teach wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations such that operation as the attachment orientation sensing unit further comprises sensing a rotation angle of the attachment orientation of the distance measurement device on the basis of how many degrees the positions of pixels at the same distance to the reference surface in the distance image acquired by the distance image acquisition unit have rotated from a specific reference position ([0029] – sensing alignment via sensing distortion of images and difference between expected and actual pixel locations).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to use the rotation sensing method, as taught by Droz, in the device as taught by Sergeev, as modified, because, by sensing rotation, the device can sense alignment of the device between positions, and thus improve data quality (See Droz [0029]-[0031]).
Claim 9: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1. Sergeev, as modified, does not teach, but Droz does teach wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations further comprising a correction possibility determination unit configured to determine whether to correct a measurement result in the distance measurement device based on a sensing result in the attachment orientation sensing unit ([0029] – sensing distortions and [0030] – combining images to correct distortions).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to use the rotation sensing method, as taught by Droz, in the device as taught by Sergeev, as modified, because, by sensing rotation, the device can sense alignment of the device between positions, and thus improve data quality (See Droz [0029]-[0031]).
Claim 11: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 10, wherein the processor is configured with the program to perform operations such that operation as the attachment orientation sensing unit further comprises sensing the attachment orientation by using the distance information and the angle information with respect to the reference surface acquired at the specific sensing position (Sergeev [0036] – using reference points to find yaw and pitch angles).
Claim 12: Sergeev, as modified, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1, but not further comprising a memory unit configured to store information related to the attachment orientation of the distance measurement device sensed by the attachment orientation sensing unit.
However, Sergeev does teach correcting for the determined yaw and pitch angles ([0011[-[0012]). It would be obvious that this this would require a memory unit to store the attachment orientation data.
Claim 14: Sergeev, as modified in view of Lai, teaches the attachment orientation sensing device according to claim 1, wherein the distance measurement device is any one of a TOF (time-of-flight) sensor, a LiDAR (light detection and ranging), or an SC (structural camera) (Sergeev [0032]).
Claim 15: Claim 15 is a method claim corresponding to Claim 1. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim 16: Sergeev teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing an attachment orientation sensing program for sensing an attachment orientation of a distance measurement device mounted on a specific thing, the program causing a computer ([0034], control device 11) to execute an attachment orientation sensing method comprising:
a distance information acquisition step of acquiring from the distance measurement device distance information about the distance to a reference point on a reference surface (Fig. 1, optoelectronic sensor 5 and [0033]-[0034]),
an angle information acquisition step of acquiring angle information about the angle to the reference point from the distance measurement device ([0036] – determining angular deviation and yaw and pitch angles);
and an attachment orientation sensing step of sensing the attachment orientation of the distance measurement device with respect to the reference surface on the basis of the distance information and the angle information acquired in the distance information acquisition step and the angle information acquisition step ([0012] – describing pitch and yaw, and [0036] – determining pitch and yaw).
and distance image generation step of generating a distance image including the reference surface, on the basis of an acquisition results of the distance information acquisition step and the angle information acquisition step ([0005] – creating sensor image and [0031] – determining distance),
wherein: the reference surface is a floor surface (Fig. 2 and [0035], measurement structures 14 on ground);
Sergeev does not teach, but Lai does teach the distance acquired according to a phase difference between a received light wave and an emitted light wave emitted from an emission unit included in the distance measurement onto the reference surface ([0024] – comparing phase).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to use the phase difference range finding, as taught by Lai, in the device as taught by Sergeev, because, as Lai teaches, this is an existing, and known, way to determine distance ([0002]). Thus, this would be a known method which would yield predictable results (as the method is well known).
Sergeev, as modified, does not teach, but Droz does teach wherein in the attachment orientation sensing step a rotation of the attachment orientation of the distance measurement device is sensed based on whether a center position of a distribution of pixels at the same distance to the floor surface in the distance image acquired by the distance image generation unit is moving from a specific reference position or is stationary ([0029] – sensing alignment via sensing distortion of images and difference between expected and actual pixel locations).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to use the rotation sensing method, as taught by Droz, in the device as taught by Sergeev, as modified in view of Lai, because, by sensing rotation, the device can sense alignment of the device between positions, and thus improve data quality (See Droz [0029]-[0031]).
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 CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 571-270-5227. 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.
/CLARA G CHILTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
17/953,403
Prosecution Insights