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 Amendment
Claims 15-29 and 31-34 are pending. Claims 1, 19-22, 24, 27, 31-32, 34 are currently amended. Claim 30 is canceled.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 objected to because of the following informalities: consider -- wherein a midpoint of the virtual connection line is an origin of rotation at a start of rotary traveling of the robot cleaner in which the pair of rotation plates are rotated in a same direction and at a same speed of the robotic cleaner, as the previous language might be interpreted that the pair of rotation places rotate in a same direction and at a same speed of the robotic cleaner. The examiner notes that the rotation plates are part of the robotic cleaner, and may not be clear how part of the robotic cleaner rotates at the same speed as the robotic cleaner as a whole, given that there are two separate rotation plates in different positions. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 15-17, 19, 20, 25, 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (KR 20160090569 A) in view of Jang (US 20180296053 A1) and Song (US 20040088080 A1).
With respect to claim 15, Heo discloses: A robot cleaner comprising: a body having a space therein to accommodate a motor (main body 10, which is not shown in the figures but is described in [0020], but the outer shell of robot 100 shown in fig. 3 is understood to represent a main body; [0046] described robot cleaner as reference character 100, a first and second motor is within main body as in [0009]); a pair of rotation plates rotatably arranged on a bottom surface of the body (rotation plates 110 and 120, figs 1, 3; [0020]), each rotation plate among the pair of rotation plates including a lower side coupled to a mop (coupled to mops 210 and 220, fig. 1, on back of plate as in [0021,0023]), each mop being configured to face a floor surface (mop can clean/face floor surface as in [0023]); and a virtual connection line connecting axes of rotation of the pair of rotation plates to each other (a line can be drawn between the center of each of the mops under the robotic cleaner), wherein in rotary traveling of the robot cleaner, a midpoint of the virtual connection line moves on the floor surface (exemplary movement in fig 10, [0077] where the entire robot cleaner including a midpoint between the mop moves).
Heo does not explicitly disclose that a body having a space therein to accommodate a battery, a water container, and a displacement sensor disposed on the bottom surface of the body and configured to measure a distance the robot cleaner moves along the floor surface, wherein the displacement sensor is configured to measure a distance between the midpoint of the virtual connection line and an origin of rotation in rotary traveling. Heo, however discloses that the robot cleaner is battery powered (see [0042], the mops engaging with the floor through friction to drive the robot as in [0025]),
Jang, in the same field of endeavor, related to robotic cleaners, teaches of placing a water container inside a body of the robot cleaner (water tank 80, fig. 10, inside body 10; [0105-0106]), and a battery inside a body of the robot cleaner (94, fig. 10; [0106,0107]). Jang teaches that this arrangement balances the friction to ensure uniform contact with the floor ([0106,0107]), which enhances cleaning ([0047]). Jang also teaches that using water to clean the floor provides an advantage of a wet cleaning function to remove stuck objects ([0045]), creating an effect of hand mopping and scrubbing ([0046], unlike a conventional cleaner ([0005-0006]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Heo, such that the body has a space therein to accommodate a battery, a water container, as taught by Jang, for the purpose of providing a wet cleaning effect to remove stuck objects by supplying water using a water tank, and for the purpose of ensuring uniform contact with the floor which enhances cleaning, using the arrangement of a battery and water tank in the body.
Regarding a displacement sensor disposed on the bottom surface of the body and configured to measure a distance the robot cleaner moves along the floor surface, wherein the displacement sensor is configured to measure a distance between the midpoint of the virtual connection line and an origin of rotation in rotary traveling, Song, in the same field of endeavor, related to robotic cleaners, teaches of providing displacement sensor disposed on the bottom surface of the body and configured to measure a distance the robot cleaner moves along the floor surface (a bottom facing camera 50, fig. 2a, [0039], the camera can measure distance and direction as in [0046], to facilitate driving of the cleaner and minimize deviation from a planned path), wherein the displacement sensor is configured to measure a distance between the midpoint of the virtual connection line and an origin of rotation in rotary traveling (the camera can measure a distance between the robot (the position of the midpoint of the virtual connection line relative to the position of two mops of the robot cleaner on the body does not change as the robot of Heo does not change in shape, so the bottom sensor of Song can measure the distance between the robot [and the fixed position of the midpoint of the virtual connection line relative to the two mops on the body] and an origin of rotation by detecting deviation, in terms of distance and direction; thus the sensor can measure displacement between a point on the robot and a reference point [origin of rotation], by measuring displacement). Song teaches that this arrangement with a bottom sensor aid in cleaning efficiency by reducing position errors ([0004]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Heo, with the displacement sensor of Song, for the purpose of increasing in cleaning efficiency by reducing position errors.
With respect to claim 16, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 15 above and further teaches: wherein the midpoint of the virtual connection line moves in a spiral trajectory on the floor surface (Heo, the arrangement in fig. 10, is described as a spiral path in [0077]).
With respect to claim 17, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 15 above and further teaches: wherein the midpoint of the virtual connection line moves in a flat circular trajectory on the floor surface (Heo, the arrangement in fig. 10, described in [0077], shows at least one flat circular trajectory as indicated by a thick solid arrow).
With respect to claim 19, Heo discloses: A robot cleaner comprising: a body (main body 10, which is not shown in the figures but is described in [0020], but the outer shell of robot 100 shown in fig. 3 is understood to represent a main body; [0046] described robot cleaner as reference character 100); a pair of rotation plates including mopping cloths coupled to lower sides thereof and facing a floor surface (rotation plates 110 and 120, figs 1, 3; [0020], coupled to mops 210 and 220, fig. 1, on back of plate as in [0021,0023]); mop can clean/face floor surface as in [0023]), the pair of rotation plates being rotatably disposed on a bottom surface of the body (rotation plates 110 and 120, disposed on bottom of body as shown in fig. 3, and rotates as in [0039]) and a virtual connection line connecting axes of rotation of the pair of rotation plates to each other (a line can be drawn between the center of each of the mops under the robotic cleaner), wherein a midpoint of the virtual connection line is an origin of rotation at a start of rotary traveling in which the pair of rotation plates are rotated in a same direction and at a same speed of the robot cleaner (there are two movements where the midpoint of a virtual connection line is an origin of rotation, a first movement shown in fig. 8 and described in [0070-0071], the movement of fig. 8 is at a same speed and direction as in [0071]; and a second movement shown in fig. 10, and described in [0076-0077], where the center of the robot [which is where the midpoint between the two plates are as shown in fig. 10] is the starting point of the spiral pattern; the robot transitions between the modes [from the first mode where the rotation plates are rotating in a same direction/speed to other modes as part of a travel process, as in [0075-0076]).
Heo does not explicitly disclose that a body having a space therein to accommodate a battery, a water container, and a displacement sensor disposed on the bottom surface of the body and configured to measure a distance the robot cleaner moves along the floor surface. Heo, however discloses that the robot cleaner is battery powered (see [0042], the mops engaging with the floor through friction to drive the robot as in [0025]).
Jang, in the same field of endeavor, related to robotic cleaners, teaches of placing a water container inside a body of the robot cleaner (water tank 80, fig. 10, inside body 10; [0105-0106]), and a battery inside a body of the robot cleaner (94, fig. 10; [0106,0107]). Jang teaches that this arrangement balances the friction to ensure uniform contact with the floor ([0106,0107]), which enhances cleaning ([0047]). Jang also teaches that using water to clean the floor provides an advantage of a wet cleaning function to remove stuck objects ([0045]), creating an effect of hand mopping and scrubbing ([0046], unlike a conventional cleaner ([0005-0006]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Heo, such that the body has a space therein to accommodate a battery, a water container, as taught by Jang, for the purpose of providing a wet cleaning effect to remove stuck objects by supplying water using a water tank, and for the purpose of ensuring uniform contact with the floor which enhances cleaning, using the arrangement of a battery and water tank in the body.
Regarding a displacement sensor disposed on the bottom surface of the body and configured to measure a distance the robot cleaner moves along the floor surface, Song, in the same field of endeavor, related to robotic cleaners, teaches of providing displacement sensor disposed on the bottom surface of the body and configured to measure a distance the robot cleaner moves along the floor surface (a bottom facing camera 50, fig. 2a, [0039], the camera can measure distance and direction as in [0046], to facilitate driving of the cleaner and minimize deviation from a planned path). Song teaches that this arrangement with a bottom sensor aid in cleaning efficiency by reducing position errors ([0004]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Heo, with the displacement sensor of Song, for the purpose of increasing in cleaning efficiency by reducing position errors.
With respect to claim 20, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 19 above and further teaches: wherein the midpoint of the virtual connection line is located in the origin of rotation at the start of the rotary traveling (Heo, during the rotation mode of fig. 8, [0070-0071]), and wherein in rotary traveling, a distance between the origin of rotation and the midpoint of the virtual connection line is maintained to be shorter than a distance between the midpoint of the virtual connection line and the axes of rotation of the pair of rotation plates (Heo, the distance between the midpoint and the origin of rotation is zero, as the robot is centered on that point as in [0070], and given that there is a physical distance between the axes of rotation of the pair of rotation plates, a distance of zero/centered would be less than said distance).
With respect to claim 25, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 19 above and further teaches: wherein the pair of rotation plates have a same rotational direction and different rotational speeds (Heo, [0076], during the spiral mode, as in the movement shown in fig. 10, and described in [0076-0077], where the center of the robot [which is where the midpoint between the two plates are as shown in fig. 10] is the starting point of the spiral pattern).
With respect to claim 26, Heo, as modified, teaches, the limitations of claim 19 above and further teaches: wherein the midpoint of the virtual connection line moves on the floor surface in one of a spiral trajectory, a flat circular trajectory and an oval trajectory (Heo, a spiral trajectory that includes within a circular trajectory is shown during the as in the movement shown in fig. 10, and described in [0076-0077]).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (KR 20160090569 A) in view of Jang (US 20180296053 A1) and Song (US 20040088080 A1) and further in view of Takenaka (US 20050188494 A1).
With respect to claim 18, Heo, as modified teaches the limitations of claim 15 above however does not explicitly teach wherein the midpoint of the virtual connection line moves in an oval trajectory on the floor surface. Heo, however teaches that the midpoint of the virtual connection line moves in a flat circular trajectory on the floor surface (Heo, the arrangement in fig. 10, described in [0077], shows at least one flat circular trajectory as indicated by a thick solid arrow).
Takenaka, in the same field of endeavor, related to robotic cleaning [a self-propelled cleaner], teaches that a cleaning path can be a circular spiral (fig. 5b, [0026]), but that it can also be an oval/elliptical spiral (fig. 6b, [0030]). Takenaka teaches that the user sets the cleaning area using the aspect ratio ([0030]), and that this technique provides for efficient cleaning without cleaning outside the set area ([0029]).
MPEP 2143 provides that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results to be obvious.
It would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have substituted the circular cleaning trajectory of Heo for the oval trajectory of Takenaka, as a matter of simple substitution of one known element for another. The results of the substitution would have been predictable. Additionally, the arrangement would have accommodated a user’s preference for a oval cleaning area, as Takenaka teaches this would be set by the user, with the result providing for efficient cleaning of that oval area.
Claim(s) 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (KR 20160090569 A) in view of Jang (US 20180296053 A1) and Song (US 20040088080 A1), as applied to the rejection of claim 20 above and further in view of Jeon (KR 20090104390 A).
With respect to claim 21, Heo, as modified teaches the limitations of claim 20 above however does not explicitly teach a controller configured to determine, in the rotary traveling, whether an axis of rotation of the robot cleaner deviates from the origin of rotation by determining whether the midpoint of the virtual connection line moves away from the origin of rotation. As previously noted, the robotic cleaner of Heo includes a rotary traveling movement where the robot rotates around an origin of rotation (movement shown in fig. 8 and described in [0070-0071], the origin of rotation being the midpoint as addressed in the rejection of claim 20 above). Heo, however further teaches of a controller that controls the operation of the robot cleaner (control unit 170, fig. 4; [0039]).
Jeon, in the same field of endeavor, as related to robot cleaner, teaches of a controller configured to determine if the robotic cleaner has deviated from an intended cleaning path (control unit 10 controls the operation of the wheel/movement of the robotic cleaner as in the last 7 lines of page 2 of the translation; page 5 lines 7-21 describe how the robot cleaner is provided with a correction movement in response to the cleaner being deviated from the intended cleaning path, the deviation calculated using a gyro 16). Jeon teaches that this arrangement ensures even cleaning of a specific area by correcting the robotic cleaner movement (page 5 lines 33-35), the deviation can be caused by an external force (abstract).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Heo, with the teachings of Jeon, to determine if a robotic cleaner has deviated from the intended cleaning path, for the purpose of ensuring even cleaning, in case the robot cleaner is deviated in position by an external force. The modification would have resulted in a controller configured to determine, in rotary traveling, whether an axis of rotation of the robot cleaner deviates from the origin of rotation by determining whether the midpoint of the virtual connection line moves away from the origin of rotation, by applying the teachings of Jeon, to determine if the robotic cleaner deviated/moved away from the origin of rotation that defines a cleaning path.
With respect to claim 22, Heo, as modified teaches the limitations of claim 21 above and further teaches the controller is configured to control a first rotation plate among the pair of rotation plates that is located furthest from the origin of rotation to rotate faster than a second rotation plate among the pair of rotation plates during a rotation correction operation (Heo, [0078-0080], where the cleaner returns to the original reference point by deceleration while maintaining a difference between the speed of the two mops, and also further includes as part of the rotation correction operation, having the second mode is performed in reverse as in [0080], which as described in [0073], one mop is stopped, and the other is rotated [causing a speed difference after the deceleration described in the rejection of claim 27]; the origin of rotation is the stationary mop here, with the rotation plate that is furthest from an origin of rotation to be rotated faster than the stationary plate).
With respect to claim 23, Heo, as modified teaches the limitations of claim 22 above and further teaches a first motor connected to the first rotation plate; and a second motor connected to the second rotation plate, (Heo, motors 150a, 150b, fig. 4; [0028]) wherein the controller is configured to control, in the rotation correction operation, an output of the first motor to be greater than an output of the second motor (as explained in the rejection of claim 22 above, the two plates of Heo have different speeds [the first motor further from origin would be faster/rotates], therefore the output of one would have been greater than the other).
With respect to claim 24, Heo, as modified teaches the limitations of claim 22 above and further teaches wherein a rotational speed difference between the first rotation plate located furthest from the origin of rotation and the second rotation plate the second rotation plate located closest to the origin of rotation increases as the distance between the origin of rotation and the midpoint of the virtual connection line increases (examiner’s understanding that this limitation is not necessarily during the rotation correction operation; [0076-0077] of Heo provides that acceleration is maintained at a constant ratio as the robot moves outward in the spiral pattern of fig. 10; therefore, if the robot modes outward the speed increases; furthermore, as the places are geometrically spaced apart, and as shown in fig. 10 of Heo, one of them would be closest to the origin, and one further from the origin, the claim requires the difference to increase, and because of the nature of maintaining a constant ratio, as the robot moves outward, the difference between both would increase during acceleration; claim also does not require that a particular one of the first or second rotation plate [closer/further from origin] is the faster plate, but rather an increasing speed difference between the two).
Claim(s) 27-29, 31-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (KR 20160090569 A) in view of Jeon (KR 20090104390 A).
With respect to claim 27, Heo discloses: A method of controlling a robot cleaner, the robot cleaner including a body (main body 10, which is not shown in the figures but is described in [0020], but the outer shell of robot 100 shown in fig. 3 is understood to represent a main body; [0046] described robot cleaner as reference character 100) and a pair of rotation plates (rotation plates 110 and 120, figs 1, 3; [0020]) having lower sides coupled to mopping cloths configured to face a floor surface (mops 210 and 220, fig. 1, on back of plate as in [0021,0023]); mop can clean/face floor surface as in [0023]), the robot cleaner traveling by rotation of the pair of rotation plates ([0040]), the method comprising: a rotary traveling operation of causing the robot cleaner to perform rotary traveling by controlling the rotation of the pair of rotation plates (first rotational mode, same direction and speed, fig. 8; [0071-0072]); and a rotation correction operation of rotating the pair of rotation plates at different rotational speeds ([0078-0080], where the cleaner returns to the original reference point by deceleration while maintaining a difference between the speed of the two mops, this describes the return after a spiral movement as described in [0077], fig. 10; however examiner notes that the “rotation correction operation” can be interpreted more broadly to include an rotation operation for cleaning/correcting/rectifying a dirty spot, that includes rotating the pair of rotation plates at different rotational speeds, for example, the spiral movement of Heo is for intensively cleaning a user selected area in [0069]). Heo however does not explicitly disclose a deviation determination operation of determining whether a rotation axis of the robot cleaner deviates from an origin of rotation by determining whether a current midpoint moves away from the origin of rotation (however, in the previously mentioned a rotary traveling operation, shown in fig. 8, the robot rotates around an origin of rotation at 500, fig. 8; being centered around that point as in [0070]).
Jeon, in the same field of endeavor, as related to robot cleaner, teaches of deviation determination operation to determine if the robotic cleaner has deviated from an intended cleaning path (page 5 lines 7-21 describe how the robot cleaner is provided with a correction movement in response to the cleaner being deviated from the intended cleaning path, the deviation calculated using a gyro 16). Jeon teaches that this arrangement ensures even cleaning of a specific area by correcting the robotic cleaner movement (page 5 lines 33-35), the deviation can be caused by an external force (abstract).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Heo, with the teachings of Jeon, to determine if a robotic cleaner has deviated from the intended cleaning path (i.e. a rotation axis of the robot cleaner deviates from an origin of rotation by determining whether a current midpoint moves away from the origin of rotation, the robot rotating around the midpoint), as part of a deviation determination operation, for the purpose of ensuring even cleaning, in case of an external impact to the cleaner (claim does not require anything to be done in response to detecting deviation)
With respect to claim 28, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 27 above, and further teaches: wherein in the rotary traveling operation, the pair of rotation plates are rotated in a same direction (Heo, first rotational mode, same direction and speed, fig. 8; [0071-0072]).
With respect to claim 29, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 27 above, and further teaches: wherein in the rotary traveling operation, the pair of rotation plates are rotated at a same speed (Heo, first rotational mode, same direction and speed, fig. 8; [0071-0072]).
With respect to claim 31, Heo, as modified teaches, the limitations of claim 27 above, and further teaches: wherein in the rotation correction operation, a rotational speed difference between the pair of rotation plates is increased as the robot cleaner moves away from a position corresponding to a start of the rotary traveling (Heo, as part of the rotation correction operation, the second mode is performed in reverse as in [0080], which as described in [0073], one mop is stopped, and the other is rotated [causing a speed difference after the deceleration described in the rejection of claim 27]; this operation would have caused at least a portion [the rotating mop relative to the mop that doesn’t rotate] of the robot cleaner to move way from a position corresponding to the center of rotational after the robot cleaner has returned to the reference point]).
With respect to claim 32, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 27 above, and further teaches: wherein a controller is configured to control (Heo, control unit 170, fig. 4; [0039], control operation and movement of the robot cleaner) in the rotation correction operation, a first rotation plate among the pair of rotation plates that is located furthest from the origin of rotation to rotate faster than a second rotation plate among the pair of rotation plates (Heo, as part of the rotation correction operation, the second mode is performed in reverse as in [0080], which as described in [0073], one mop is stopped, and the other is rotated [causing a speed difference after the deceleration described in the rejection of claim 27]; the origin of rotation is the stationary mop here, with the rotation plate that is furthest from an origin of rotation to be rotated faster than the stationary plate).
With respect to claim 33, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 32 above, and further teaches: wherein the robot cleaner further includes: a first motor connected to the first rotation plate; and a second motor connected to the second rotation plate (Heo, motors 150a, 150b, fig. 4; [0028], connected to representative rotation plates 110/120 as in [0028]), and wherein in the rotation correction operation, an output of the first motor is controlled to be greater than an output of the second motor (as explained in the rejection of claim 32 above, the two plates of Heo have different speeds [the first motor closer further from origin would be faster], therefore the output of one would have been greater than the other).
Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (KR 20160090569 A) and Jeon (KR 20090104390 A), and further in view of Kim (KR 20090091592 A) and Lee (KR 20180008251 A)
With respect to claim 34, Heo, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 32 above, however does not explicitly teach wherein the rotation correction operation includes a continued increase in a rotation speed of the first rotation plate located furthest from the origin of rotation to be faster and a continued decrease in a rotation speed of the second rotation plate located closest to the origin of rotation until a midpoint of a virtual connection line is at a same location as the origin of rotation.
However, as addressed in the rejection of claim 27 above, Heo also discloses of a rotation correction operation that returns the robot to the origin of rotation (Heo, [0078-0080]). Heo also discloses of a controller that controls the robot movement (Heo, control unit 170, fig. 4; [0039], control operation and movement of the robot cleaner).
Kim, in the same field of endeavor, relating to robotic cleaners, teaches of a way of moving the robotic cleaner in a spiral pattern. Specifically, Kim teaches that the speed of each wheel (analogous to the instant mop plates), should be the following relationship (which is noted to increase the speed of one wheel while decreasing the speed of the other based on how the + and - signs work to calculate the speed based on the radius [or distance to the origin of rotation]; V1 would get larger as the radius increases; V2 would get smaller, as the radius is in the denominator of the fraction):
PNG
media_image1.png
93
500
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Where, V is the speed of the robot cleaner, b is the distance between the left and right wheels, and r is the radius of the cleaning trajectory of the robot cleaner (page 2 lines 77-85 of the translation). Kim teaches that this formula is simple and low on the load of the controller of the robot (page 2 lines 90-93), solving the problem of having the robot constantly and slowly change direction (page 2 lines 54-69).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Heo, with the teachings of Kim, such that the rotation correction operation includes a continued increase a rotation speed of the first rotation plate to be faster and a continued decrease in a rotation speed of the second rotation plate until the midpoint of a virtual connection line is at a same location as the origin of rotation, by using the equation of Kim to drive the speed of the rotation plate depending on how far the cleaner [as the cleaner moves back towards the origin] is from the center of origin, as this calculation is simple on the load of the robot controller.
As for the limitation “the first rotation plate [is] located furthest from the origin of rotation […] the second rotation plate [is] located closest to the origin”, Lee, in the same field of endeavor, related to robot cleaners, teaches that that the robot cleaner with spin mops are controlled based on what direction the robot cleaner should move in ([0051], referencing the left or right directions). Lee thus provides the understanding, that in Heo, which uses the difference between the two spin mops to rotate in the spiral pattern (Heo, movement shown in fig. 10, and described in [0076-0077]; the rotation correction operation returns to the initial starting point in Heo, [0078-0080]), the direction of the spiral pattern (clockwise or counterclockwise) depends on which of the spin mops (i.e. the one closer to the center of rotation or the other one) is rotated faster.
MPEP 2143 provides that it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected from a finite number of predictable solutions. Lee demonstrates there are a finite number of predictable solutions (which of the two mops to rotate faster than the other), given the need to select an appropriate turning/rotation direction of the spiral, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have, with predictable results, chosen to have a first rotation plate among the pair of rotation plates that is located furthest from the origin of rotation to rotate faster than a second rotation plate among the pair of rotation plates. This would have been done with a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 103 rejection, the applicant’s arguments are directed towards the displacement sensor recited in amended claim 15 (response pages 8-12). The applicant argues that this was not disclosed in the art of record. The examiner’s response is that this aspect is found in the newly cited reference Song, which provides for a bottom facing camera that can detect displacement and direction, which increases cleaning efficiency by reducing positioning errors (and also addresses the functional limitation of “measure a distance between the midpoint of the virtual connection line and an origin of rotation in rotary traveling” because it can measure displacement between a point on the robot and a reference point [origin of rotation], by measuring displacement). The applicant also argues that similar arguments apply to other independent claims 19 and 27. In regards to claim 19, the examiner’s response to the arguments directed towards claim 15, except that claim 19 does not contain the limitation “measure a distance between the midpoint of the virtual connection line and an origin of rotation in rotary traveling”). Claim 27 is noted not to recite the displacement sensor, however the examiner notes that Jeon as applied to claim 30, also applies to the new limitations in claim 27, as Jeon is directed towards detecting displacement of the robotic cleaner from a travel path, which includes displacement from an intended movement around a center point (the particulars of that movement are already disclosed by Heo), and that nothing in the claim requires anything to be done after the deviation is determined.
No specific arguments were directed towards the dependent claims.
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 Steven Huang whose telephone number is (571)272-6750. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:30 am to 2:30 pm, Friday 6:30 am to 11:00 am (Eastern Time).
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/Steven Huang/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/TOM RODGERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights