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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 07/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument regarding secondary reference to Edwards is acknowledged. As indicated in the interview held on 07/23/2026, the argument is not persuasive. The teaching that was relied upon for modifying primary reference of Daum is the mounting location of a camera on a robotic arm as taught by Edwards. Hence, the argument directed to the different types of cameras between Daum and Edward is not persuasive. Nevertheless, in light of the amendment, a new secondary reference is being used in the provided rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15-22, 25, 26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Daum (US (US 20020121291 A1).
Regarding claim 15 - Daum ‘291 discloses an automated method for cleaning an interior of a vehicle comprising: determining a position of the vehicle with respect to one or more robotic arms positioned exterior to the vehicle (P.0087, "The sensors 124 and the cameras 126 characterize controlled with software the topography and the environment of the cleaning tool in order to recognize for example threatening collisions in time and to control the robot arm 12 correspondingly. The software can register the shape of the vehicle 4 before beginning of the cleaning program course so that the type and model of the vehicle 4 is recognize in order to control the movements of the robot arm 12 for the carrying out of the cleaning program"); scanning a configuration of the vehicle to yield a configuration scan (P.0030, "picture recognition of all sides, from above as well as from behind and in front. The motor vehicle type and the coordinates of the windows are defined", P.40, "Through picture recognition a further measurement of the vehicle is carried out with opened doors and opened trunk"); identifying surfaces to be cleaned (P.0030, "The coordinates are used to define the location of the cleaning zones"); creating and/or modifying a plurality of tool paths for the one or more robotic arms to clean the identified surfaces (P.0087); wherein the plurality of tool paths are created and/or modified based on comparing the configuration scan with a master scan to identify one or more obstacles; adjusting the plurality of tool paths to avoid the one or more obstacles (P.0006, “… The model of the vehicle whose interior is supposed to be cleaned is identified by a picture identification system which is part of the software …”, P. 0025 “…invented procedure is provided with information about a number of car types. Topographical and geometrical information of existing car types stored in the system guarantee a collision-free movement of the cleaning tool and the robot arm. Sensors will not only detect environmental changes of the interior of the car, compared to the stored data of the car type… to avoid collision”, P.0087 “…The software can register the shape of the vehicle 4 before beginning of the cleaning program course so that the type and model of the vehicle 4 is recognize in order to control the movements of the robot arm 12…”, this teaches picture identification from a master scan/master picture is compared with live scan by camera 126 to control cleaning device and avoid collision); and controlling the one or more robotic arms to move along the created and/or modified plurality of tool paths and execute a cleaning operation in the interior of the vehicle (P.0041).
Regarding claim 16, Daum discloses: prior to scanning the configuration of the vehicle, acquiring information about the vehicle by retrieving master data (P.0030, "Step 3... Alternatively, the car can carry a bar code like coding to be defined or simply the customer enters the exact car type by means of a keyboard or automatic identification card insertion into the system"; P.0040, "Step 6: Through picture recognition a further measurement of the vehicle is carried out") from a database (P. 0025, "existing car types stored in the system", P.0087).
Regarding claim 17 - Daum ‘291 discloses aligning data from the configuration scan with the master data (P.0025, "Sensors will not only detect environmental changes of the interior of the car, compared to the stored data of the car type, but will also detect if for instance the car door to insert the robot arm is opened or closed").
Regarding claim 18 - Daum ‘291 discloses detecting obstacles based on discrepancies between the configuration scan and the aligned master data (P.0046, "Obstacles that cannot be assigned to the expected vehicle geometry led the robot to avoid that particular zone").
Regarding claim 19 - Daum ‘291 discloses the plurality of tool paths are created and/or modified to avoid the detected obstacles by a predetermined distance (P.0087).
Regarding claim 20 - Daum ‘291 discloses scanning the configuration of the vehicle includes scanning a doorjamb, and wherein the scanned doorjamb configuration (P.0040, "With that information the system recognizes cleaning positions to be excluded (Doors in front, to the right and/or to the left; Doors behind, to the right and/or to the left of; Trunk)") is aligned with corresponding doorjamb data stored in the master data (P.0025, "Sensors will not only detect environmental changes of the interior of the car, compared to the stored data of the car type, but will also detect if for instance the car door to insert the robot arm is opened or closed").
Regarding claim 21 - Daum ‘291 discloses scanning the configuration of the vehicle includes capturing a plurality of exterior images (P.0030, "picture recognition of all sides, from above as well as from behind and in front") and interior images of the vehicle (P.0040, "Step 6: Through picture recognition a further measurement of the vehicle is carried out with opened doors and opened trunk"; Paragraph [25], "In addition sensors record the environment of the cleaning tool and the robot arm. Sensors will not only detect environmental changes of the interior of the car, compared to the stored data of the car type...").
Regarding claim 22 - Daum ‘291 discloses creating optimized tool paths by running the created tool paths through at least one of a free space motion system or a cartesian motion planning system (P.0087, "controlled with software the topography and the environment of the cleaning tool in order to recognize for example threatening collisions in time and to control the robot arm 12 correspondingly").
Regarding claim 25 - Daum ‘291 discloses an automated method for cleaning an interior of a vehicle comprising: storing a plurality of images for a plurality of vehicles in a database to create a master data package (P.0006, P.0025 & P.0087); acquiring vehicle specific data from the master data package (P.0025 "Sensors will not only detect environmental changes of the interior of the car, compared to the stored data of the car type"); scanning a configuration of the vehicle (P.0030); aligning the acquired vehicle specific data with the scanned configuration (P.0025); creating a process plan for execution of a plurality of cleaning operations based on the scanned configuration by aligning tool paths from the master data package to a current vehicle position based on the scanned configuration (P.0025, P.0087); adjusting the aligned tool paths to avoid one or more obstacles observed in the scanned configuration by truncating at least one aligned tool path (P.0046, step 9, “…Obstacles that cannot be assigned to the expected vehicle geometry lead the robot to avoid that particular zone…”, avoiding particular zone results in truncating/modifying or cutting short some of the tool path), and converting the adjusted tool paths to robot motion paths (P.0025, “…the system guarantee a collision-free movement of the cleaning tool and the robot arm…”); sending instructions to a robot to execute the plurality of cleaning operations based on the process plan; and executing the plurality of cleaning operations in accordance with the instructions (P.0041)
Regarding claim 26 - Daum ‘291 discloses the master data package includes at least one of vehicle make and model data (P.0006, P.0025)
Regarding claim 28 - Daum ‘291 discloses providing feedback on a quality of the executed plurality of cleaning operations (P.0007)
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 9-13 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daum (US (US 20020121291 A1) in view of Li (CN 109278716).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 29 - Daum ‘291 discloses a system for cleaning an interior of a vehicle comprising: a robotic arm positioned outside of the vehicle (Fig. 1), the robotic arm including an end effector configured as a cleaning implement for cleaning a surface in the interior of the vehicle (P.0006, Fig. 1 & 21); a camera mechanically configured to scan the interior of the vehicle, the camera being positioned outside of the vehicle (Fig.1 &21); and a first controller configured to create and/or modify a tool path to execute a cleaning operation, based on the scan, and to send instructions to the robotic arm to execute the cleaning operation in accordance with the created and/or modified tool path, wherein the first controller is configured to compare the scan of the interior of the vehicle with a master scan to identify a position of a movable object or one or more obstacles, and to create and/or modify the tool path to clean the movable object or avoid the one or more obstacles (P.0006, “…The model of the vehicle whose interior is supposed to be cleaned is identified by a picture identification system which is part of the software …”, P. 0025 “…invented procedure is provided with information about a number of car types. Topographical and geometrical information of existing car types stored in the system guarantee a collision-free movement of the cleaning tool and the robot arm. Sensors will not only detect environmental changes of the interior of the car, compared to the stored data of the car type… to avoid collision”, P.0087 “…The software can register the shape of the vehicle 4 before beginning of the cleaning program course so that the type and model of the vehicle 4 is recognize in order to control the movements of the robot arm 12…”, this teaches picture identification from a master scan/master picture is compared with live scan by camera 126 to control cleaning device and avoid collision).
Daum ‘297 discloses sensor 124 mounted on a robot arm for detecting object in the vehicle (Fig. 21). However, it is not explicit that the sensor is a camera.
Li ‘716 discloses an automated vehicle cleaning robot located outside of a vehicle (Fig. 2). Li teaches that camera 105 could be mounted on a robotic arm (Fig.9) for scanning the vehicle to control movement of the cleaning robot.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing of the claimed invention, to have mounted a scanning camera on Daum ‘291 robotic arm as taught by Li ‘716 to facilitate the scanning of a vehicle’ s interior. The modification yields predictable result of providing a camera as sensing/scanning means on a cleaning robotic arm to facilitate movement control of the robot.
Besides stating that the system contains plural cameras 126 (P.0087), the modification also yields additional camera for Daum ‘291 system per claim 29.
Regarding claim 2 - Daum ‘291 discloses a communication system coupled to the controller (P.0087, software communicates with camera and controller).
Regarding claim 3 - Daum ‘291 discloses communication system includes a quality assurance feedback loop (P.0007, repeat cleaning).
Regarding claim 5- Daum ‘291 discloses the camera is configured to detect at least one of object present in the vehicle (P.0046, P.0047).
Regarding claim 6- Daum ‘291 discloses the camera is positioned outside of the vehicle (Fig.1 & 21)
Regarding claim 9- Daum ‘291 discloses a database of a plurality of stored vehicle configurations (P.0025, "Topographical and geometrical information of existing car types stored in the system").
Regarding claim 12- Daum ‘291 discloses a linear rail located above the vehicle, the robot arm movable along the linear rail (P.0021, "In order to reach the different interior fields of the various vehicle types the robot arm is arranged at a trolley appliance in the ceiling field of the cleaning-garage").
Regarding claim 13- Daum ‘291 discloses a conveyor upon which the vehicle is carried (element 8; P.0029, "The car can by a mechanical control system be guided through the machine on special lanes"), and wherein the robot is configured to move along the linear rail in coordination with a motion of the conveyor (P.0073, "After completion of the cleaning course of the cleaning process, which is carried out from a robot arm 12 with a cleaning tool 14, shown in this FIG. 1 in the trunk of the car 4, the car is automatically guided by tracks 8 to a reworking site 16").
Regarding claim 11 (dependent upon claim 29)- Daum ‘291 discloses the another camera is located at a position above a roof of the vehicle (Figure 21; element 126; P.0030, "picture recognition of all sides, from above").
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daum (US (US 20020121291 A1) in view of Li (CN 109278716) and further in view of Yako (US 20170297537).
Regarding claim 4- Daum ‘291 discloses configured to receive data from one or more sensors to mitigate collision (P.0047, P.0087). However, it does not explicitly teach a second controller.
Yako ‘537 teaches: a second controller (P.0017, "The system 100 may include a plurality of data collectors 110. The data collectors 110 may include a variety of devices. For example, various controllers in a vehicle may operate as data collectors 110 to provide data 115").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cleaning robot with a robot arm for cleaning the interior of a car while avoiding collisions by using sensors and cameras, a camera being on a robotic arm, of modified Daum., to include the various controllers, and the controller operating as a data collector, as taught by Yako ‘537. Such modification would have been obvious because such application would have been well within the level of skill of the person having ordinary skill in the art and would have yielded predictable results. The predictable results including: a cleaning robot with a robot arm for cleaning the interior of a car while avoiding collisions by using sensors and cameras, a camera being on a robotic arm, and various controllers including one for data collecting.
Regarding claim 14- Daum ‘291 discloses a state machine configured to manage timing (P.0087). Daum ‘291 does not explicitly teach coordination of a plurality of cleaning implements associated with a plurality of robotic arms.
However, Yako ‘537 teaches coordination of a plurality of cleaning implements associated with a plurality of robotic arms (element 170; P.0012, "The system can include a bar and/or cleaning arms that push trash off a vehicle seat and onto a vehicle floor").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cleaning robot with a robot arm for cleaning the interior of a car while avoiding collisions by using sensors and cameras, a camera being on a robotic arm, of modified Daum, to include the multiple arms for cleaning the vehicle, as taught by Yako. Such modification would have been obvious because such application would have been well within the level of skill of the person having ordinary skill in the art and would have yielded predictable results. The predictable results including: a cleaning robot with multiple robot arms for cleaning the interior of a car that avoiding collisions in time.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daum (US (US 20020121291 A1) in view of Li (CN 109278716) as indicated per claim 1 and 29 above and further in view of Brown et al. (US 2020/0398429).
Modified Daum ‘291 discloses having cameras for scanning the vehicle. However, it is not explicit that the cameras are 3D cameras.
Brown ‘429 discloses a robot having working arm with attached 3D cameras (Fig. 2A&B, P.0045. Brown ‘291 teaches that 3D camera facilitates robot working arm with depth perception for movement control (P.0045)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide Daum’ 291 cameras with 3D ones as taught by Brown ‘429 for depth perception. The modification yields predictable result of depth perception scanning for vehicle interior to facilitate robot arm control.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daum (US 20020121291 A1) in view Lin (CN 113427490 A).
Daum ‘291 discloses the limitations set forth per rejection of claim 15 above, including a method for a robot arm for cleaning a vehicle interior, it does not expressly teach: creating the plurality of tool paths includes implementing an algorithm to plan trajectories for the robot using a sampler-based approach.
However, Lin ‘490 teaches creating the plurality of tool paths includes implementing an algorithm to plan trajectories for the robot using a sampler-based approach (P.0017, "DWA local path planning algorithm is sampling multiple groups of speed in the speed space, and simulating the track of the robot in a certain time under the multiple groups of speed, and evaluating the track, selecting the speed corresponding to the optimal track to drive the movement of the robot").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cleaning robot with a robot arm for cleaning the interior of a car utilizing sensors and cameras to register the exact car type and cleaning zones, as well as avoiding collisions in the interior of the car of Daum ‘291, to include utilizing DWA local path planning for movements of the robot, as taught by Lin ‘490. Such modification would have been obvious because such application would have been well within the level of skill of the person having ordinary skill in the art and would have yielded predictable results. The predictable results including: with a robot arm for cleaning the interior of a car utilizing sensors and cameras to register the exact car type and cleaning zones, as well as avoiding collisions in the interior of the car, utilizing DWA local path planning for movements of the robot.
Claims 24 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daum (US 20020121291 A1) in view of Ahmad (US 20110155192 A1).
Regarding claim 24, while Daum ‘291 teaches the limitations set forth above per claim 15 rejection, including a method for a robot arm for task-sequenced cleaning a vehicle interior, it does not expressly teach optimizing a sequencing of tasks relative to a time permitted for each task.
However, Ahmad ‘192 teaches optimizing a sequencing of vehicle cleaning tasks relative to a time permitted for each task (P.0264, "activating one or more wash cycles, sub-cycles and/or phases according to pre-determined timing").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Daum ‘291 cleaning cycles and sequencing of cleaning tasks to include activating cycles and/or phases according to pre-determined timing, as taught by Ahmad. Such modification would have been obvious because such application would have been well within the level of skill of the person having ordinary skill in the art and would have yielded predictable results. The predictable results including: a cleaning robot with a robot arm for cleaning the interior of a car, activating cleaning cycles and/or phases according to pre-determined timing.
Regarding claim 27, while Daum ‘291 discloses the limitations set forth above per rejection of claim 25 including a method for a robot arm for cleaning a vehicle interior, it does not expressly teach a cycle time between a start of the scanning the configuration of the vehicle and an end of the execution of cleaning operations is less than five minutes
However, Ahmad ‘192 teaches a cycle time between a start of the scanning the configuration of the vehicle and an end of the execution of cleaning operations is less than five minutes (.0012, "Timers (and/or controllers) and solenoid valves to turn on and off all pre-programmed cycles to wash vehicles"; P.0264, "activating one or more wash cycles, sub cycles and/or phases according to pre-determined timing"; It is reasonable to ascertain to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the pre-determined timing can be five minutes and the timer may turn off the pre-programmed cycle before five minutes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Daum ‘291 cycle time to include activating scanning and ending cleaning cycles according to pre-determined timing, as taught by Ahmad’192. Such modification would have been obvious because such application would have been well within the level of skill of the person having ordinary skill in the art and would have yielded predictable results. The predictable results including: a cleaning robot having scanning and cleaning cycles according to pre-determined timing including less than five minutes.
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 Supervisory Patent Examiner Khoi Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-6919. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:00 AM to 5:30 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.
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.
/KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights