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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Background
The Amendments to the Claims in the Applicant’s Preliminary Amendment, filed on 04/26/23, and Preliminary Amendment, filed on 08/21/23, have been entered.
According to the Amendments, claims 1-25 were pending. Claims 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, and 14-18 have been amended. Claims 3, 6, 7, 12, 13, and 21-25 have been canceled. Claims 26-29 have been added. Thus, claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8-11, 14-20, and 26-29 are pending.
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) 1, 2, 4, 5, 8-11, 14, 18, 19, 20, and 26-29 is/are rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2020/156260 to Takasaki et al. (Takasaki) in view of US Pub. No. 2011/193363 to Nishiwaki et al. (Nishiwaki). In regards to claims 1 and 19, Takasaki discloses an item packing system (10) and method of using the same, the system configured to sort and/or pack items (OBJ) into item containers (CB), the system comprising: a robotic arm (1000, 1000A); at least one end effector (1a, 40a) for holding and manipulating an item to be sorted and/or packed, wherein at least one end effector comprises a pressure sensing assembly (see ¶ [0112] for providing a force sensor configured to detect the holding force exerted on an object during loading operations); and a controller (see ¶ [0065] for providing a control means for controlling grasping and holding forces of a robotic hand/end effector of a loading apparatus during loading operations) configured to receive sensor signals from the pressure sensing assembly to obtain an indication of: (i) a magnitude of contact pressure for contact between the end effector and the item held by the end effector (¶ [0065]); and wherein the controller is configured to determine whether the end effector is correctly holding the item based on the indication of the magnitude of the contact pressure (see ¶¶ [0065], [0112] for controlling end effector motion during loading operations based on grasping and holding forces captured by the force and angle sensors).
Although Takasaki does not explicitly disclose determining whether the end effector is correctly holding the item based, in part, on an indication of a direction of contact pressure between the end effector and an item being held by the end effector, such a feature is found in the prior art. In fact, Nishiwaki teaches a grasping apparatus (2) including a tactile sensor (10) which in turn includes a stress sensing device (200) configured to obtain a direction of contact pressure for contact between the end effector and the item held by the end effector (see ¶ [0003]) and a controller (4) configured to determine whether the end effector is correctly holding the item based on an indication of the direction of contact pressure (see ¶¶ [0140-0144] for determining whether the grasping arm is grasping an object as intended based on shear force sensor signals and pressure force sensor signals captured by a tactile sensor and relayed to the control device).
Thus, it would have been obvious to modify the transfer apparatus of Takasaki with the anti-slip control feature of Nishiwaki in order to grasp an object not only without breaking it but also without letting the object slip and drop. See ¶¶ [0003-0005].
In regards to claims 2 and 20, Nishiwaki further discloses that the system is configured to determine if the end effector is correctly holding the item if both: (i) the indication of the magnitude of contact pressure is within a selected pressure range, and (ii) the indication of the direction of contact pressure is within a selected direction range, wherein the system is configured to receive an indication of the type of item to be sorted and/or packed, and wherein the selected pressure range and/or the selected direction range is selected based on the indication of the type of item. See Fig. 12.
In regards to claims 4 and 26, Nishiwaki further discloses that the system is configured to determine that the end effector is not correctly holding the item if at least one of: (i) the indication of the magnitude of contact pressure has increased or decreased by more than a first amount; (ii) the indication of the magnitude of contact pressure is increasing or decreasing by more than a first rate of change; (iii) the indication of the direction of contact pressure has changed by more than a second amount; and (iv) the indication of the direction of contact pressure is changing by more than a second rate of change. See Fig. 13 (showing slipping detection).
In regards to claim 5, Nishiwaki further discloses that the system is configured to determine that the end effector is not correctly holding the item if at least one of: (i) the indication of the magnitude of contact pressure is changing while the indication of the direction of contact pressure remains constant; and (ii) the indication of the direction of contact pressure is changing while the indication of the magnitude of contact pressure remains constant. See Fig. 13.
In regards to claim 8, Takasaki further discloses that the controller is configured to: (i) obtain one or more images of each item to be sorted and/or packed; and (ii) perform an image analysis on each image to determine whether to pack that item into an item container. See ¶ [0004] (providing a control means for controlling pick-and-place operations in containers, the control means being operably coupled to an image processing means to facilitate sorting items into groups of items to be placed in containers and groups of items not to be placed in containers).
In regards to claim 9, Takasaki further discloses that wherein in the event that the controller determines that an item should be packed into an item container based on the image analysis, the controller is configured to control the robotic arm to place said item into a said item container; and in the event that the controller determines that an item should not be packed into an item container based on the image analysis, the controller is configured to control the robotic arm so that the item is placed into a discard region. See ¶ [0004].
In regards to claim 10, Takasaki further discloses that the controller is configured to obtain at least one image of each item before said item is to be picked up by the one or more end effectors, and in the event that the controller determines that said item should not be packed into an item container based on the image analysis of said at least one image obtained before the item is to be picked up, the controller is configured to control the robotic arm not to pick up the item. See ¶ [0004].
In regards to claim 11, Takasaki further discloses that the controller is configured to obtain at least one image of an item after said item has been picked up by the one or more end effectors, and in the event that the controller determines that said item should not be packed into an item container based on the image analysis of said at least one image obtained after the item has been picked up, the controller is configured to control the robotic arm to place the item in the discard region, for example wherein the end effector is configured to perform a firmness test on the item and, in the event that the item does not pass the firmness test, to place the item into the discard region. See ¶ [0004].
In regards to claim 14, Takasaki further discloses that in the event that the system determines that the one or more end effectors are not holding the item correctly, the system performs at least one of the following actions: (i) rejects the item for review; (ii) logs the rejection in a database, optionally with a timestamp; (iii) triggers an alert notification; (iv) returns the item to where it was picked, for example to enable further visual inspection of the item; (v) attempts to obtain a new indication of the size of the item; (vi) determines if the item is bruised or damaged; and (vii) provides feedback for use in training a machine learning algorithm. See ¶ [0004] (inspecting and measuring objects for damage or other defects).
Claim 15 is rejected under § 103 as being obvious over Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki, supra, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US Pub. No. 2019/0176326 to Bingham et al. (Bingham). For claim 15, Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki discloses all limitations of the claimed invention but for a LIDAR-equipped robotic arm.
Although Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki does not explicitly disclose this limitation, such a feature is found in the prior art. In fact, Bingham teaches a robotic arm system comprising a light detection and ranging, LIDAR (112), apparatus for determining a distance to the item. See ¶¶ [0061-0062] (providing a LIDAR for object detection).
Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki with the object detection control feature of Bingham in order to determine object distance as well as one or more characteristics of an object influencing grasping and loading operations.
Claim 16 is rejected under § 103 as being obvious over Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki, supra, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US Pub. No. 2021/0368685 to Wisdom et al. (Wisdom). For claim 16, Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki discloses all limitations of the claimed invention but for a chemical/ripeness/firmness sensor.
Although Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki does not explicitly disclose this limitation, such a feature is found in the prior art. In fact, Wisdom teaches an automated harvesting system comprising at least one of: (i) a chemical sensor for detecting the chemical composition of the item held by said end effector, (ii) a ripeness sensor for detecting the ripeness of the item held by said end effector, and (iii) a firmness sensor for detecting how firm the item is, for example wherein the firmness sensor comprises a camera configured to perform visual inspection of the item. See ¶¶ [0004] & [0083] (providing harvester for harvesting crops, the harvester including an imaging device for determining whether an object is ready for harvesting based on data captured by a ripeness sensor).
Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki with the ripeness control feature of Bingham in order to determine during object inspection whether objects are ready for pick-and-place operations.
Claim 17 is rejected under § 103 as being obvious over Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki, supra, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US Pub. No. 2022/0340695 to Rasmussen et al. (Rasmussen). For claim 17, Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki discloses all limitations of the claimed invention but for pressure sensor equipped with electronic skin.
Although Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki does not explicitly disclose this limitation, such a feature is found in the prior art. In fact, Rasmussen teaches a pressure sensor for a robotic gripper comprising an electronic skin made from a substrate comprising: a base polymer layer (15); a first intermediate polymer layer (7) attached to the base polymer layer by a first adhesive layer, the first intermediate polymer layer comprising a first intermediate polymer in which electron-rich groups are linked directly to one another or by optionally substituted C.sub.1-4 alkanethiol groups; and a first conductive layer (13) attached to the first intermediate polymer layer by a second adhesive layer or by multiple second adhesive layers between which a second intermediate polymer layer or a second conductive layer is disposed. See Fig. 7; see also ¶¶ [0013-0016] (providing a pressure sensor having layered components).
Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki with the electronic skin pressure sensor of Rasmussen in order to measure grasping/holding forces with greater precision than other more conventional pressure sensors.
Claim 18 is rejected under § 103 as being obvious over Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki, supra. For claim 18, Takasaki discloses a fruit and/or vegetable packing system configured to sort and/or pack items of fruit and/or vegetables into open punnets, wherein the fruit and/or vegetable packing system comprises the item packing system of claim 1, supra. See ¶ [0004].
Claim 27 is rejected under § 103 as being obvious over Takasaki in view of Nishiwaki, supra. For claim 27, Nishiwaki discloses a computer readable non-transitory storage medium comprising a program for a computer configured to cause a processor to perform the method of claim 19, supra. See ¶ [0142] (providing a CPU with memory for storing computer programs executable by a processor configured to carry out robot control operations).
In regards to claim 28, Takasaki further discloses that the system further comprises a camera, and wherein the system is configured to use the camera (6) to provide an indication of at least one of (i) the location and (ii) the size of the item to be sorted and/or packed; and wherein the system is further configured to move the robotic arm and control the one or more end effectors to pick up the item based on the indication provided by the camera, wherein the system is configured to determine whether to pack an item into an item container based on the obtained indication of size for the item, for example wherein the system is configured to determine into which of a plurality of item containers to place the item based on the obtained indication of size for the item. See ¶¶ [0004] & [0045] (providing an inspection apparatus having a camera configured to gather one or more characteristics of objects within images in order to classify, sort, pick, and place select objects in containers).
In regards to claim 29, Takasaki further discloses that in the event that the controller determines that the one or more end effectors are not correctly holding the item, the controller is configured to control at least one of the end effectors to move relative to the item, wherein controlling at least one of the end effectors to move comprises at least one of: (i) moving the end effector inwards to increase its contact pressure on the item in the event that the magnitude of contact pressure is too low; (ii) moving the end effector outwards to decrease its contact pressure on the item in the event that the magnitude of contact pressure is too high; and (iii) moving the end effector around the item to a different location on the surface of the item in the event that the direction of contact pressure is not in the correct direction. See Figs. 12 & 13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE LOGAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-7769. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JACOB SCOTT can be reached on (571) 270-3415. 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.
/KYLE O LOGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655