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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/29/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Sako (JP 2017144301 A), Tong (KR 20150145384 A), and Karasikov et al. (US 2019/0246858) regarding the limitation “wherein the magazine alignment control sensor is configured to control horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a magazine when the grip part grips the magazine by moving a position of the grip part” have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Upon further search and consideration, Ebner et al (KR 20100113113 A) is applied in combination with the cited prior art references to teach the above-mentioned limitation.
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 11-12, 14-17, 21, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako et al. (JP 2017144301 A), in view of Tong (KR 20150145384 A), and further in view of Karasikov et al. (US 2019/0246858 A1) and Ebner et al. (KR 20100113113 A).
Regarding claim 11, Sako teaches:
A mobile robot (Figs. 1 and 2; [0028] “self-propelled electric vacuum cleaner 10”) comprising:
a transport member (Fig. 1(B); [0028] “rectangular flat plate shaped casing”); and
a work member (Figs. 1 and 2; [0038] “manipulator 30”) disposed on the transport member (Figs. 1 and 2; [0038] “this manipulator 30 is provided on the right side surface in the front running direction of the electric vacuum cleaner 10.”),
wherein the transport member includes a first sensor member (Figs. 1(A) and 1(B); [0033] “camera 21”) disposed on a side surface of the transport member (Fig. 1(A) “the camera 21 is provided on the side surface of the casing”); and a second sensor member (Figs. 1(A) and 1(B); [0033] “camera 22”) spaced apart from the first sensor member (Figs. 1(A) and 1(B) show camera 22 is spaced apart from camera 21),
wherein the first sensor member is configured to sense an obstacle ([0035] “when recognizing a non-cleaning object, the images of the cameras 21 to 24 are correlated with the identification information (non-cleaning object ID) of the recognized non-cleaning object”) in a horizontal direction of the transport member ([0033] “the camera 21 is provided on the side surface of the casing in front of the roller 17 of the vacuum cleaner 10 so that the shooting direction (optical axis direction) is substantially parallel to the bottom surface 10b” – Parallel to the surface 10b indicates a horizontal direction),
...
wherein the work member further includes:
a work robot (Fig. 1(A); [0038] “a Velcro hand section 33.”);
...
wherein the work robot includes a joint part ([0041] “The coupling portion 33a”) and a grip part ([0042] “gripping portion 33 c”).
Sako does not specifically teach a magazine accommodating part.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Tong teaches a magazine accommodating part (Fig. 1; [0016] “magazine loading unit 200”; [0020] “the magazine loading unit 200 provided on the upper end of the trolley 100 has a plurality of horizontal boards 211 on which vertical magazines 2 can be placed”).
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 teachings of Sako, to include a magazine accommodating part, as taught by Tong. Such modification allows the robot to place selected magazines in the magazine accommodating part.
Neither Sako nor Tong specifically teaches wherein the second sensor member senses an obstacle in a vertical direction of the transport member; a magazine alignment control sensor combined to the work robot, wherein the magazine alignment control sensor is configured to control horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a magazine.
However, Karasikov teaches:
a first sensor member senses an obstacle in a horizontal direction of the transport member (Fig. 3C; [0106] “FIG. 3C schematically illustrates a lateral coverage by a plurality of imaging sensors”; [0108] “lateral fields-of-view 45 of different fixed imaging sensors 43 cover different sides, including front, back, right, and left sides.), and
a second sensor member senses an obstacle in a vertical direction of the transport member (Fig. 3D; [0106] “FIG. 3D schematically illustrates vertical coverage by a plurality of imaging sensors”; [0109] “vertical fields-of-view 47 provide complete altitude coverage from the floor to the zenith.”).
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, to include a first sensor member to sense an obstacle in a horizontal direction, and a second sensor member to sense an obstacle in a vertical direction, as taught by Karasikov, in order to ensure that the field of view of the sensor members cover all of the surroundings of the mobile robot, as suggested by Karasikov in [0105].
Karasikov does not specifically teach a magazine alignment control sensor combined to a work robot; wherein the magazine alignment control sensor is configured to control horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a magazine.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ebner teaches:
a magazine alignment control sensor (Fig. 2; [0031] “A plurality of sensors 31a, 31b, 32a, and 32b”) combined to a work robot (Fig. 2; A plurality of sensors 31a, 31b, 32a and 32b are arranged and distributed circumferentially in two vertical planes E1 and E2 on the outer wall 30 of the taper sleeve 16 of the tool receiver 2”),
the magazine alignment control sensor is configured to control horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a magazine when the grip part grips the magazine by moving a position of the grip part (Figs. 2, 3a and 3b; [0021] “Wherein the actual position of the tool receiver relative to the tool holder is continuously identified by the sensor and is modified while the tool receiver is being pushed onto the tool holder, Wherein the tool holder is fixed within the tool receiver by the gripping device and the clamping device of the tool receiver when in its reached target position.”; [0031] “From these confirmed actual values, an actuating signal is generated which is supplied by the manipulating device to the actuating means 38 of the operating device 7, and the taper sleeve 16 of the tool receiver 2 is controlled by the sensor control Aligned in axial alignment with the taper shank 11 of the tool holder 1 provided in the magazine and pushed out.”).
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong and Karasikov, to include a magazine alignment control sensor to control horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a magazine when the grip part grips the magazine by moving a position of the grip part, as taught by Ebner. Such modification improves accuracy in determination of a spatial relation between the grip part and the magazine, thus allowing the grip part to easily pick up the magazine.
Regarding claim 12, Sako further teaches:
wherein the transport member incudes:
a first side surface (Figs. 1(A) and 2 shows there are four side surfaces of the vacuum cleaner 10);
a second side surface (Figs. 1(A) and 2 shows there are four side surfaces of the vacuum cleaner 10);
a third side surface (Figs. 1(A) and 2 shows there are four side surfaces of the vacuum cleaner 10);
a fourth side surface (Figs. 1(A) and 2 shows there are four side surfaces of the vacuum cleaner 10);
a first connection surface between the first side surface and the second side surface (Fig. 1(A) shows the corner surface where cameras 22 and 23 are disposed is the surface that connects the side surfaces); and a second connection surface between the first side surface and the third side surface (Fig. 1(A) shows the corner surface where cameras 22 and 23 are disposed is the surface that connects the side surfaces),
wherein the first sensor member is disposed on the first connection surface and the second connection surface (Fig. 1(A) shows the cameras 22 and 23 disposed on the corner surfaces; [0034] “In addition, the cameras 22 and 23 photograph the oblique right direction and the diagonally left direction of the running direction at a predetermined angle of view.”), and
wherein the second sensor member is disposed on the first side surface, the second side surface, the third side surface and the fourth side surface (Fig. 1(A) shows cameras 21 and 24 are disposed on the front and rear side surfaces; [0034] “The camera 21 photographs the front in the running direction of the self-propelled electric vacuum cleaner 10 at a predetermined angle of view ... Further, the camera 24 photographs the rear of the self-propelled electric vacuum cleaner 10 in the running direction at a predetermined angle of view.”).
Sako does not specifically teach wherein the second sensor member is disposed on the third side surface and the fourth side surface.
However, 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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to install the second sensor member on all side surfaces of the transport member, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 14, Sako, Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner do not specifically teach wherein the first sensor member is configured to sense an obstacle in the horizontal direction of 180° to 270° in a moving direction of the mobile robot.
However, Karasikov teaches wherein the first sensor member is configured to sense an obstacle in the horizontal direction of 0° to 360° in a moving direction of the mobile robot (Fig. 3C shows a horizontal coverage that covers 0° to 360°).
Therefore, 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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 15, Sako further teaches wherein the first sensor member is configured to sense an obstacle spaced apart from the mobile robot ([0035] “when recognizing a non-cleaning object, the images of the cameras 21 to 24 are correlated with the identification information (non-cleaning object ID) of the recognized non-cleaning object”). Sako, Tong, and Karasikov do not specifically teach wherein the first sensor member senses an obstacle spaced apart from the mobile robot at a distance of 0.05 m to 25 m.
However, 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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to configure the first sensor member to sense an obstacle at a distance of 0.05 m to 25m, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 16, Sako, Tong, and Ebner do not specifically teach wherein the second sensor member is configured to sense an obstacle in the vertical direction of 0° to 360° in a moving direction of the mobile robot.
However, Karasikov teaches wherein the second sensor member is configured to sense an obstacle in the vertical direction of 0° to 360° in a moving direction of the mobile robot (Fig. 3D; [0106] “FIG. 3D schematically illustrates vertical coverage by a plurality of imaging sensors of the cleaning robot shown in FIG. 1.”; [0109] “In the example shown, vertical fields-of-view 47 provide complete altitude coverage from the floor to the zenith.”).
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to configure the second sensor member to sense an obstacle in a vertical direction of 0° to 360° in the moving direction of the mobile robot, as taught by Karasikov. Such modification provides a complete altitude coverage from the floor to the zenith, as stated by Karasikov in [0109].
Regarding claim 17, Sako further teaches wherein the second sensor member is configured to sense an obstacle spaced apart from the mobile robot ([0035] “when recognizing a non-cleaning object, the images of the cameras 21 to 24 are correlated with the identification information (non-cleaning object ID) of the recognized non-cleaning object”). Sako, Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner do not specifically teach wherein the first sensor member senses an obstacle spaced apart from the mobile robot at a distance of 0.1 m to 16 m.
However, 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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to configure the second sensor member to sense an obstacle at a distance of 0.1 m to 16 m, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 21, Sako further teaches a communication unit (Fig. 3, [0048] “the electric vacuum cleaner 10 includes, as shown in FIG. 3 ... a wireless communication unit 106”).
Sako further teaches the communication unit is disposed inside the mobile robot (Fig. 3; [0048]. Sako does not specifically teach the communication unit is disposed on a side surface of the transport member. However, 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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to arrange the communication unit on a side surface of the transport member, since changing a position of the communication unit would not have modified the operation of the mobile robot, and it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 24, Sako does not explicitly teach a charging unit disposed on at least one side surface of the transport member.
However, Karasikov teaches a charging unit disposed inside the mobile robot ([0092] “Robot base 16 may include a storage battery”).
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to include a charging unit, as taught by Karasikov, in order to provide power for operation of various components of the mobile robot, as stated by Karasikov in [0092].
Sako, Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner do not specifically teach the charging unit is disposed on at least one side surface of the transport member.
However, 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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to arrange the charging unit on a side surface of the transport member, since changing a position of the charging unit would not have modified the operation of the mobile robot, and it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claims 13 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, and further in view Jong et al. (KR 20200057321 A).
Regarding claim 13, Sako, Tong, and Karasikov do not specifically teach wherein the second sensor member includes a laser distance sensor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Jong teaches wherein a second sensor member includes a laser distance sensor ([0061] “Referring to FIG. 3, the obstacle detecting unit 20 is a sensor for recognizing obstacles that are separated at a predetermined distance, including an infrared sensor and a laser sensor.
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, Ebner, to include the second sensor member as a laser distance sensor, as taught by Jong. Such modification acquires distance information between the robot and the surrounding obstacles.
Regarding claim 18, Sako further teaches a process facility alignment control sensor (Fig. 1(A); [0033] “camera 24”) disposed on the side surface of the transport member (Fig. 1(A); [0033] “A camera 24 is provided on the side of the casing behind the roller 17 of the vacuum cleaner 10 so that the shooting direction (optical axis direction) is substantially parallel to the bottom surface 10 b.”).
Sako, Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner do not specifically teach controlling alignment of the mobile robot and process facility.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Jong teaches a mobile robot for controlling alignment of the mobile robot and process facility ([0032] “Thereafter, the code mark recognition unit 40 provided in the unmanned transport vehicle 400 recognizes the form of the code mark attached to the floor of the driving route”; [0036] “the system control unit performs an operation to place the center position of the unmanned transport vehicle in the center of the code mark”).
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, to control alignment of the mobile robot and process facility, as taught by Jong, in order to allow the robot to determine traveling direction and driving speed of the mobile robot, as stated by Jong in [0032].
Regarding claim 19, Sako further teaches wherein the process facility alignment control sensor is spaced apart from the first sensor member and the second sensor member (Fig. 1(A) shows sensor 24 is spaced apart from sensors 21 and 22).
Regarding claim 20, Sako further teaches wherein the process facility alignment control sensor includes a vision camera ([0036] “The above cameras 21 to 24 are configured to include, for example, a CCD image sensor, a CMOS image sensor, and an imaging lens.”).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako, in view of Tong, Karasikov, and Ebner, and further in view of Virk (US 2012/0282065 A1).
Regarding claim 25, Sako, Tong, Karasikov, Ebner do not specifically teach wherein the charging unit is charged when the mobile robot performs a process.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Virk teaches a mobile robot comprising a charging unit, wherein the charging unit is charged when the mobile robot performs a process ([0024] “As described above, when the automated guided vehicle 14 is halted at each work station, the load 22 disposed on the cart 20 undergoes various work station operations. During the time required to execute the work station operation, the charging station 24 is used as an opportunity charger to provide a charge to the electrically powered automated guided vehicle 14 while stationary.”).
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong and Karasikov, and Ebner, to charge the charging unit when the mobile robot performs a process, as taught by Virk. Such modification allows the mobile robot to complete the assigned task while charging, thus reducing idle time spent for charging.
Claims 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0323771 A1), in view of Tong (KR 20150145384 A), and further in view of Ebner et al. (KR 20100113113 A).
Regarding claim 26, Zhao teaches:
A semiconductor magazine operation system (Fig. 1) comprising:
a step of transmitting a command to a mobile robot ([0051] “The robot scheduling system receives the task information sent by the MES system, and sends the task information to the mobile robot that is most suitable for performing the task”);
a step of moving the mobile robot to a first process facility and working ([0056] “The mobile robot receives the task information sent by the robot scheduling system, and the mobile robot autonomously navigates to the first process point according to an on-site map, and is precisely positioned at the docking point with the transmission line of the first process point by the auxiliary positioning system ...”; [0058]-[0063]);
a step of moving the mobile robot to a second process facility and working ([0064] “The mobile robot autonomously navigates to the second process point ... The transmission line on the mobile robot is docked with that at the second process point when the material transmission condition is satisfied.”; [0066]-[0071]); and
...
wherein the step of moving the mobile robot to the first process facility and working and ... include a step of docking the mobile robot with the first process facility ([0056] “the mobile robot autonomously navigates to the first process point according to an on-site map, and is precisely positioned at the docking point with the transmission line of the first process point by the auxiliary positioning system...”) ..., and
wherein the docking step includes an alignment process ([0043] “A magnetic strip is laid on the ground close to the target position, and the position of the magnetic strip has been accurately positioned in advance. When the magnetic strip detecting sensor detects the magnetic strip, the current position of the robot body is accurately positioned. In actual installation, the magnetic strip is laid at a position from the target position. For example, from the process point transmission line ΔL, assuming ΔL is the distance suitable for docking of the robot body transmission line and the process point transmission line, if the magnetic strip detecting sensor detects the magnetic strip, it stops immediately, and at this time, the robot body transmission line and the process point transmission line can be docked.”).
Zhao does not explicitly teach a step of moving the mobile robot to a third process facility and working; and wherein the step of moving the mobile robot to a third process facility and working include a step of docking the mobile robot with the third process facility.
However, 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 teachings of Zhao to include a step of moving the mobile robot to a third process facility and working, wherein the step of moving the mobile robot to a third process facility and working include a step of docking the mobile robot with the third process facility, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working steps involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Zhao does not specifically teach wherein the mobile robot includes a magazine alignment control sensor combined to the work robot, the work robot including a joint part and a grip part, and wherein the alignment process comprises controlling horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a semiconductor magazine by the magazine alignment control sensor.
However, Tong teaches a work robot (Fig. 1; [0016] “a jointed articulated robot 300”), the work robot including a joint part and a grip part (Fig. 3 shows the work robot 300 includes a joint part and a grip part for gripping magazine M), and wherein the alignment process comprises controlling horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a semiconductor magazine ([0022] “The articulated robot 300 moves the sliding door 220 by pushing the contact piece 224 in the left or right direction (see FIG. 3).”; [0028] “As shown in FIG. 4, the articulated robot 300, which collectively opens the front of each horizontal board 211, clamps a magazine M on which semi-finished semiconductor packages placed on each horizontal board 211 are mounted.” – Figs. 1, 3 and 4 show the robot 300 can be moved horizontally and vertically in order to grasp the magazine M).
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 teachings of Zhao to include a work robot, the work robot including a joint part and a grip part, and wherein the alignment process comprises controlling horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a semiconductor magazine, as taught by Tong, in order to allow the work robot to grip the magazine.
Tong does not specifically teach an alignment control sensor combined to the work robot, and the alignment process is performed by the alignment control sensor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ebner teaches:
a magazine alignment control sensor (Fig. 2; [0031] “A plurality of sensors 31a, 31b, 32a, and 32b”) combined to a work robot (Fig. 2; A plurality of sensors 31a, 31b, 32a and 32b are arranged and distributed circumferentially in two vertical planes E1 and E2 on the outer wall 30 of the taper sleeve 16 of the tool receiver 2”),
wherein the alignment process comprises controlling horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a magazine by the magazine alignment control sensor when the grip part grips the magazine by moving a position of the grip part (Figs. 2, 3a and 3b; [0021] “ Wherein the actual position of the tool receiver relative to the tool holder is continuously identified by the sensor and is modified while the tool receiver is being pushed onto the tool holder, Wherein the tool holder is fixed within the tool receiver by the gripping device and the clamping device of the tool receiver when in its reached target position.”; [0031] “From these confirmed actual values, an actuating signal is generated which is supplied by the manipulating device to the actuating means 38 of the operating device 7, and the taper sleeve 16 of the tool receiver 2 is controlled by the sensor control Aligned in axial alignment with the taper shank 11 of the tool holder 1 provided in the magazine and pushed out.”).
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 teachings of Sako, in view of Tong and Ebner, to include a magazine alignment control sensor to control horizontal and vertical alignment of the grip part and a magazine when the grip part grips the magazine by moving a position of the grip part, as taught by Ebner. Such modification improves accuracy in determination of a spatial relation between the grip part and the magazine, thus allowing the grip part to easily pick up the magazine.
Regarding claim 27, Zhao further teaches:
wherein the step of moving the mobile robot to the first process facility and working comprises:
a step of the mobile robot receiving a command from a control unit to move to the first process facility ([0056] “The mobile robot receives the task information sent by the robot scheduling system, and the mobile robot autonomously navigates to the first process point according to an on-site map”);
a step of docking the mobile robot and the first process facility ([0056] “the mobile robot autonomously navigates to the first process point according to an on-site map, and is precisely positioned at the docking point with the transmission line of the first process point by the auxiliary positioning system.”);
a step of starting communication between the mobile robot and the first process facility ([0058] “(S1) The first process point and the mobile robot exchange handshake signals;”; [0059]);
a step of moving the (materials) of the first process facility to ... the mobile robot ([0060] “The materials are transferred one by one from the transmission line on the first process point to the transmission line on the mobile robot”); and
a step terminating communication between the mobile robot and the first process facility ([0062] “(S5) The mobile robot detects whether there are materials at the end of the transmission line, and if there is no material, it sends a detach request to the first process point. The first process point receives the detach request, and detects whether there are materials at the end of its own transmission line, and if there is no material, it sends a consent to the mobile robot.”).
Zhao does not specifically teach a step of moving the semiconductor magazine of the first process facility to a magazine accommodating part of the mobile robot by a working robot of the mobile robot.
However, Tong teaches a step of moving the semiconductor magazine of the first process facility ([0026] “the oven is carried on the induction device attached to the floor of the workshop”) to a magazine accommodating part (Fig. 1; [0016] “magazine loading unit 200”) of the mobile robot by the work robot (Fig. 1; [0016] “jointed articulated robot 300”) of the mobile robot ([0030] “the articulated robot 300 clamps the magazine M in the oven, draws the magazine M from the oven, and then inserts the magazine M into the empty horizontal board 211.”).
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 teachings of Zhao, in view of Tong and Ebner, to move a semiconductor magazine of the first process facility to a magazine accommodating part of the mobile robot by a working robot of the mobile robot, as taught by Tong, in order to allow the mobile robot to transport the semiconductor magazine to a next process, thus improving workability and work speed, as stated by Tong in [0012].
Claims 28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0323771 A1), in view of Tong (KR 20150145384A) and Ebner et al. (KR 20100113113 A)., and further in view of Suzuki (JP 2014184530A) and Jong et al. (KR 20200057321 A).
Regarding claim 28, Zhao further teaches:
wherein the mobile robot includes a camera or a process facility alignment control sensor ([0018] “a magnetic strip detecting sensor disposed on the mobile robot”) ..., and
wherein the step of docking the mobile robot and the first process facility comprises:
a step of acquiring an image of a mark of the first process facility by the process facility alignment sensor ([0043] “A magnetic strip is laid on the ground close to the target position, and the position of the magnetic strip has been accurately positioned in advance. When the magnetic strip detecting sensor detects the magnetic strip, the current position of the robot body is accurately positioned. In actual installation, the magnetic strip is laid at a position from the target position.”).
Zhao, Tong, and Ebner do not specifically teaches a step of correcting the offset of the X-axis and the Y-axis measured by the third sensor member and the center of the image to
±
40 mm or less after the mobile robot acquires the image of the first process facility.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Suzuki teaches:
a step of correcting the offset of the X-axis and the Y-axis measured by a process facility alignment control sensor ([0030 “camera 12”) and the center of the image to
±
40 mm or less ([0032] “the positional deviation ΔY in the Y-axis direction become substantially zero”) after the mobile robot acquires the image of the first process facility ([0030] “The control device 3 is based on the photographed image of the marking M photographed by the camera 12 of the sensor unit 11, the positional deviation ΔX in the X-axis direction from the center of the camera 12 (center position of photographed image) to the marking M”; [0031] “The control device 3 corrects the positional deviation ΔX in the X-axis direction from the center of the camera 12 to the marking M and the positional deviation ΔY in the Y-axis direction (step S106).”; [0032] “The control device 3 determines whether or not the positional deviation ΔX in the X-axis direction and the positional deviation ΔY in the Y-axis direction become substantially zero or less than a predetermined value”).
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 teachings of Zhao, in view of Tong and Ebner, to correct an offset of the X-axis and the Y-axis measured by the third sensor member and the center of the image to
±
40 mm or less after the mobile robot acquires the image of the first process facility, as taught by Suzuki. Such modification ensures accurate recognition of a position of the marker in order to facilitate an operation of the robot.
Zhao, Tong, Ebner, and Suzuki do not specifically teach the mark includes a QR mark.
However, Jong teaches a sensor member including a QR code ([0104] “the QR code recognition unit 40 is a vision sensor”), and a step of acquiring an image of a QR mark ([0104 “the QR code recognition unit 40 is a vision sensor including a scan camera, and recognizes a code mark attached to the floor on a progress path of an unmanned transport vehicle”).
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 teachings of Zhao, in view of Tong, Ebner, and Suzuki, to acquire an image of a QR mark, as taught by Jong, in order to determine the position information including the driving speed of the unmanned transport robot, driving information including the driving direction, and the current position of the unmanned transport robot, as stated by Jong in [0112].
Regarding claim 30, Zhao, Tong, and Ebner do not specifically teach wherein the magazine alignment control sensor includes a camera, wherein the step of moving the semiconductor magazine of the first process facility to a magazine accommodating part of the mobile robot by a working robot of the mobile robot comprises: a step of moving the work robot to a position of a vision marker of the first process facility; a step of acquiring the vision marker of the first process facility by the magazine alignment control sensor combined with the work robot; and a step of controlling the center coordinates of the magazine alignment control sensor and the center coordinates of the vision marker to +0.08 mm or less by comparing the center coordinates of the fourth sensor member and the center coordinates of the vision marker.
However, Suzuki teaches:
a step of moving the work robot to a position of a vision marker of the first process facility that has been taught ([0028] “The control device 3 controls the actuator 23 of each joint 21 of the robot arm 22 to move the sensor unit 11 at the tip of the robot arm 22 by a predetermined amount in the X-axis direction and the Y-axis direction. At this time, the camera 12 of the sensor unit 11 captures an image of the marking M set in advance.”);
a step of acquiring the vision marker of the first process facility by the magazine alignment control sensor combined with the work robot (Fig. 1; [0028] “The control device 3 controls the actuator 23 of each joint 21 of the robot arm 22 to move the sensor unit 11 at the tip of the robot arm 22 by a predetermined amount in the X-axis direction and the Y-axis direction. At this time, the camera 12 of the sensor unit 11 captures an image of the marking M set in advance.”); and
a step of controlling the center coordinates of the magazine alignment control sensor and the center coordinates of the vision marker to +0.08 mm or less by comparing the center coordinates of the magazine alignment control sensor and the center coordinates of the vision marker ([0030] “The control device 3 is based on the photographed image of the marking M photographed by the camera 12 of the sensor unit 11, the positional deviation ΔX in the X-axis direction from the center of the camera 12 (center position of photographed image) to the marking M”; [0031] “The control device 3 corrects the positional deviation ΔX in the X-axis direction from the center of the camera 12 to the marking M and the positional deviation ΔY in the Y-axis direction (step S106).”; [0032] “The control device 3 determines whether or not the positional deviation ΔX in the X-axis direction and the positional deviation ΔY in the Y-axis direction become substantially zero or less than a predetermined value”).
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 teachings of Zhao, in view of Tong and Ebner, to correct an offset of the X-axis and the Y-axis measured by the third sensor member and the center of the image to
±
40 mm or less after the mobile robot acquires the image of the first process facility, as taught by Suzuki. Such modification ensures accurate recognition of a position of the marker in order to facilitate an operation of the robot.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0323771 A1), in view of Tong (KR 20150145384A) and Ebner et al. (KR 20100113113 A). and further in view of Virk (US 2012/0282065 A1).
Regarding claim 29, Zhao, Tong, and Ebner do not specifically teach a step of charging the mobile robot through the first process facility after the step of starting communication between the mobile robot and the first process facility.
However, Virk teaches a step of charging the mobile robot through the first process facility after the step of starting communication between the mobile robot and the first process facility (Fig. 1; [0023] “The sensor 26 generates and transmits a first signal to the program processor 28. The first signal is received by the processor 28 in order to indicate the presence of the automated guided vehicle 14 at the charging station 24. Upon receipt of the first signal, the processor controls the charging station 24 to begin the charging operation.”).
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 teachings of Zhao, in view of Tong and Ebner, to charge the mobile robot through the first process facility after the step of starting communication between the mobile robot and the first process facility, as taught by Virk. Such modification allows the mobile robot to complete the assigned task while charging, thus reducing idle time spent for charging.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NHI Q BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-3962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 10:00 AM - 6:00PM EST.
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, KHOI TRAN can be reached at (571) 272-6919. 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.
/NHI Q BUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656