Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
Claims 1-3, 6-8, 10-11, 17-19, and 21 are currently pending for examination.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) under 35 USC 103 in and Song have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejections under 35 USC 103 in regards to Womble are not persuasive. Applicant argues that “No portion of Womble discloses or suggests that information on a location where the barking sound was detected is recorded on a map” and that “Womble relates to the duration of the barking, and not the time when the barking was detect. Accordingly, Womble fails to disclose or suggest the concept of associating barking sound detections with spatial location information on a map.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Womble [0062] begins recording when a bark is detected (timestamp) and provides a map of pet movements over a period of time (Womble [0059]) and notes when bathroom activities occur (Womble [0073]).
However, in light of the amendment and upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ding, Ko, Song, and Womble.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20250127362A1 Ding et al ("Ding") in view of US20220111522A1 Ko et al ("Ko") and US20150342150A1 (“Womble”).
As per claims 1 and 17, Ding teaches the limitations of the method and product:
A method of controlling a robot vacuum cleaner: detecting a Ding at least the abstract, [0110], [0294], [0110], [0157], [0304]).
Ding does not disclose:
receiving, by a plurality of ultra wideband (UWB) antennas, a UWB signal from a first UWB device; obtaining location information about a pet based on the UWB signal received by the plurality of UWB antennas; moving the robot vacuum cleaner based on the obtained location information so that the robot vacuum cleaner is located to monitor the pet;
Ko teaches the aforementioned limitations (Ko at least the abstract, [0028]: “UWB antenna mounted on the moving object…recognize the position of the moving object, and control the main drive unit to move the main body based on the position of the moving object”, [0248]: “moving object…animal…pet”, [0025]: “the controller may control the drive unit to rotate or move the main body toward the sensed position of the moving object with an operation corresponding to the sensing.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Ko with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to monitor a pet for safety (Ko [0014]).
Ding does not disclose:
wherein the barking monitoring information comprises information indicating a time when the barking sound was detected and a location where the barking sound was detected, and based on a barking sound of the pet being maintained for more than a reference time, recording, on a map, information on the location where the barking sound was detected and recording, associated with the map, information on the time when the barking sound was detected.
Womble teaches the aforementioned limitations (Womble at least the abstract, [0059]: “Device 100 may also record the location of itself and/or the animal and provide such information to the caregiver. For example, device 100 may use the GPS device to provide a map of movements over a period of time to the caregiver via a remote data connection.”, [0062]: “ if the barking exceeds certain parameters (example, constant barking for more than 30 minutes, etc.) and also notifies the owner via cell phone, tablet, or computer 602, or notify a third person or agency 604. The animal care device 100 may take action based on the bark i.e., … recording when a bark is detected, or alert the owner of a possible threat and allow the owner to view the location”, [0073]: “Hello Joe, Rover has not eaten yet today but has gone to the bathroom within the last 10 minutes.”). *Examiner’s note: here Womble can record pet movement data on a map, record barking duration, record barking time or similarly the time stamp of a pet activity (“when a bark is detected”/”within the last 10 minutes”) and relate a bark to location by allowing an owner to view the location.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Womble with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to provide care for a pet (Womble [0003]).
As per claim 2, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
moving the robot vacuum cleaner to a periphery of the pet based on the obtained location information about the pet.
Ko teaches the aforementioned limitation (Ko at least [0028], [0025],[0248], [0033-0035]) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Ko with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine these references is the same as above in claim 1.
As per claim 3, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
first UWB device is mounted on the pet, and the obtaining the location information about the pet comprises: identifying a location of the first UWB device; and identifying the location of the first UWB device as a location of the pet.
Ko teaches the aforementioned limitation (Ko at least [0028], [0248]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Ko with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine these references is the same as above in claim 1.
As per claim 6, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
the plurality of UWB antennas are provided in a main body of the robot vacuum cleaner.
Ko teaches the aforementioned limitation (Ko at least FIG. 1, 103, [0055]: “UWB sensors”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Ko with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine these references is the same as above in claim 1.
As per claim 18, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
execute the at least one instruction to control the moving assembly to move the robot vacuum cleaner to a periphery of the pet based on the obtained location information about the pet.
Ko teaches the aforementioned limitation (Ko at least [0028], [0248], [0033-0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Ko with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine these references is the same as above in claim 1.
As per claim 19, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
first UWB device is mounted on the pet, and the at least one processor is further configured to execute the at least one instruction to: identify the location of the first UWB device, and identify the location of the first UWB device as a location of the pet.
Ko teaches the aforementioned limitation (Ko at least [0028], [0248]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Ko with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine these references is the same as above in claim 1.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding, Ko, and Womble in view of US20200029768A1 Mellinger et al ("Mellinger").
Regarding claim 7, Ding in combination with the other references teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
plurality of UWB antennas are provided in a charger of the robot vacuum cleaner.
However, Mellinger teaches the aforementioned limitation (Mellinger at least [0028]: "hub device…wireless communications device", [0029]: “plurality of carrier signals, frequencies or frequency bands”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Mellinger with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to improve the effectiveness of cleaning operations (Mellinger [0018]).
Claim(s) 8, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding, Ko, and Womble in view of US20240214670A1 Pak et al ("Pak").
Regarding claim 8, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
monitoring of the pet comprises: photographing the pet using a camera of the robot vacuum cleaner, to thereby produce a photographed image and transmitting the photographed image to an external device.
However, Pak teaches the aforementioned limitation (Pak at least [0049-0050]: "nose print of a companion animal is newly registered…transmitted to the server and the identification information…previously stored…images").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Pak with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to improve image quality for identifying a companion animal (Pak abstract).
Regarding claim 11, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
inputting monitoring information collected by an operation of monitoring the pet into a model; and obtaining identification information about the pet from the model.
However, Pak teaches the aforementioned limitation (Pak at least the abstract: "images…identification of the companion animals…artificial intelligence-based learning").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Pak with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine these references is the same as above in claim 8.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding, Ko, and Womble in view of US20210200234A1 Song ("Song").
Regarding claim 10, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding teaches the robot avoiding objects (Ding [0192-0196]) and cleaning specific area (Ding [0215]). Ding does not disclose:
determining when the pet has left the cleaning region, and after it is determined that the pet has left the cleaning region, control the robot vacuum cleaner
Ko teaches the aforementioned limitations (Ko at least [0035], [0020-0021], [0043], [0197]). *Examiner’s note: here Ko teaches how the robot avoids the object (pet) in its work area and monitors the movements of the object (pet). Ko FIG. 6 algorithm stops after the object leaves the area.
Ding does not disclose:
determining a cleaning region of the robot vacuum cleaner based on the obtained location information about the pet.
However, Song teaches the aforementioned limitation (Song at least [0020]: "setting a travelling path of the robot vacuum cleaner based on the shape information and size information related to the object").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Song with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to efficiently detect and identify objects (Song [0010]).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding, Ko, and Womble in view of US20150181840A1 Tupin et al ("Tupin").
Regarding claim 21, Ding in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Ding does not disclose:
receive expected location information about the pet from a second UWB device that includes at least one microphone, wherein the second UWB device is configured to generate the expected location information about the pet based on a barking sound detected by the at least one microphone.
However, Tupin teaches the aforementioned limitation (Tupin at least [0075]: "microphone… barking", [0229]: “using on or more devices…external to the DMS”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ding with the aforementioned limitations taught by Tupin with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to monitor an animal (Tupin abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLIVER TAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4728. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-7.
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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/O.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights