DETAILED ACTION
1. 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 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.
2. Claims 1-3 and 5-21 are pending in Instant Application.
3. Claim 4 is canceled.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed 01/23/2024 and 06/01/2023 has been received and considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Response to Arguments
5. Regarding 103 rejections: Applicant's arguments filed 2/13/2026 have been fully considered. New rejections can be found below. Layne discloses a solar powered external battery in which is separate from the mobile object and in which can charge the mobile object. Jin also discloses a solar powered charging station. Therefore, Shimamura in view of Layne teaches the amended limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1-4, 10-13, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Shimamura (US 20200356093) in view of Layne (US 20210344299).
Regarding Claim 1, Shimamura discloses A management system for a mobile object traveling within a working area, comprising: (Shimamura, see at least Fig. 1 in which showcases a management system for a mobile object (vehicle))
an information processing apparatus including a processor configured to execute a program stored in a memory so as to: (Shimamura, see at least [0086] in which the information processing apparatus may include a processor to perform operations defined by a program, in which the program is stored in memory)
and transmit the instruction information to the mobile object, thereby the operation of the mobile object is controlled, wherein the mobile object is configured to move to the charging station based on the instruction information. (Shimamura, see at least [0161] wherein the path determination section may plan the return path along which the lawn mower returns to the charging station if the remailing level of the battery satisfies a predetermined condition.)
acquire remaining amount information indicating a remaining amount of an external battery, the external battery being located within the working area and separated from the mobile object while the mobile object travels, the external battery being configured to store power that is provided to an internal battery provided in an inside of the mobile object by a charging station; generate instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the remaining amount information, the instruction information relating to an operation of the mobile object;
However, Layne discloses acquire remaining amount information indicating a remaining amount of an external battery, the external battery being located within the working area and separated from the mobile object while the mobile object travels, the external battery being configured to store power that is provided to an internal battery provided in an inside of the mobile object by a charging station; (Layne, see at least [0046] wherein operational status, performance metrics, and battery charge levels corresponding to the power shed can be used to determine settings for a robotic mower.)
generate instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the remaining amount information, the instruction information relating to an operation of the mobile object; (Layne, see at least [0046] wherein a robotic mower settings can be adjusted based on a predefined battery charge level)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Shimamura with the teachings of Layne to include the capability of using an external battery for a lawn mower, wherein the external battery is separated from the mobile object and is configured to store power that is to be utilized as a charging station by the mobile object. This could be utilized by the system of Shimamura to use a solar powered charging station, wherein based on the charging stations remaining amount of external battery, could send instructions to the mobile object on when its ready to be used. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a mobile lawn mower.
Regarding Claim 2, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 1, wherein: the processor is configured to execute the program so as to: (see rejection above)
Shimamura further discloses acquire operation information regarding the operation of the mobile object; (Shimamura, see at least [0086] “The above-described program causes the information processing apparatus described above to perform the operations defined by this program, by being executed by the processor.” Also see at least [0116], [0159] and [0126])
and generate the instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the operation information. (Shimamura, see at least [0159] wherein the path determination section 550 obtains information regarding the remaining level of the battery unit 340, and then determines a moving path of the lawn mower 210 based on the remining level of the battery unit.)
Regarding Claim 3, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 2, wherein: (see rejection above)
the processor is configured to execute the program so as to transmit the operation information to an external server managing the mobile object. (Shimamura, see at least [0159] wherein the path determination section 550 may output the information indicating the determined moving path of the lawn mower 210 to the drive control section. Also see at least [0134] wherein the control unit 380 may control the operation of the lawn mower 210 based on the instruction from the management server 230.)
Regarding Claim 5, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 1, wherein: (see rejection above)
Layne further discloses the external battery is configured to store the power from renewable energy. (Layne, see at least Fig. 8 and [0057-0058] wherein a solar powered robotic mower power shed uses battery units and a DC/AC inverter to provide electrical power to a robotic mower.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Shimamura with the teachings of Layne to include the capability of using an external battery for a lawn mower, wherein the external battery is separated from the mobile object and is configured to store power that is to be utilized as a charging station by the mobile object. This could be utilized by the system of Shimamura to use a solar powered charging station, wherein based on the charging stations remaining amount of external battery, could send instructions to the mobile object on when its ready to be used. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a mobile lawn mower.
Regarding Claim 6, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 5, wherein: (see rejection above)
Layne further discloses the renewable energy is solar energy. (Layne, see at least Fig. 8 and [0057-0058] wherein a solar powered robotic mower power shed uses battery units and a DC/AC inverter to provide electrical power to a robotic mower.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Shimamura with the teachings of Layne to include the capability of using an external battery for a lawn mower, wherein the external battery is separated from the mobile object and is configured to store power that is to be utilized as a charging station by the mobile object. This could be utilized by the system of Shimamura to use a solar powered charging station, wherein based on the charging stations remaining amount of external battery, could send instructions to the mobile object on when its ready to be used. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a mobile lawn mower.
Regarding Claim 10, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 1, wherein: (see rejection above)
the mobile object is a robotic lawn mower or a ball picker robot. (Shimamura, see at least [0094] wherein a lawn mower 210 may be an example of the moving object)
Regarding Claim 11, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 10, wherein: (see rejection above)
the processor is configured to execute the program so as to acquire operation information regarding the operation of the mobile object, (Shimamura, see at least [0116] wherein various types of information processing in the management system may be information related to the management method to manage the lawn mower including: managing the moving object or procedures to control the lawn mower) and the operation information includes a state of lawn or a state of cutting tool of the robotic lawn mower. (Shimamura, see at least [0111] wherein the management server may manage the growing condition of a plant, and also see [0118-0120] in which discloses the lawn mower 210 including a work unit in which contains a blade disk, cutter blade, and etc.)
Regarding Claim 12, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses A non-transitory computer readable media storing the program of claim 1, wherein: (see rejection above)
the program causes a computer to perform a process by the processor of the management system. (Shimamura, see at least [0115] “The above-described program may be a program which allows a computer to perform one or more procedures related to various types of information processing in the management system 200.”)
As per claim 13, the claim is directed towards a management method for a mobile object that recites similar limitations performed by the management system for a mobile object of claim 1. The cited portions of Shimamura in view of Layne used in the rejection of claim 1 teach the same system limitations of claim 13. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected under the same rationales used in the rejections of claim 1 as outlined above.
Regarding Claim 14, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management method according to claim 13, further comprising: (see rejection above)
acquiring operation information regarding the operation of the mobile object to generate the instruction information for controlling the mobile object; (Shimamura, see at least [0086] “The above-described program causes the information processing apparatus described above to perform the operations defined by this program, by being executed by the processor.” Also see at least [0116], [0159] and [0126])
and transmitting the operation information to an external server managing the mobile object. (Shimamura, see at least [0159] wherein the path determination section 550 may output the information indicating the determined moving path of the lawn mower 210 to the drive control section. Also see at least [0134] wherein the control unit 380 may control the operation of the lawn mower 210 based on the instruction from the management server 230.)
Regarding Claim 15, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management method according to claim 13, wherein: (see rejection above)
Layne further discloses the external battery is configured to store the power from renewable energy. (Layne, see at least Fig. 8 and [0057-0058] wherein a solar powered robotic mower power shed uses battery units and a DC/AC inverter to provide electrical power to a robotic mower.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Shimamura with the teachings of Layne to include the capability of using an external battery for a lawn mower, wherein the external battery is separated from the mobile object and is configured to store power that is to be utilized as a charging station by the mobile object. This could be utilized by the system of Shimamura to use a solar powered charging station, wherein based on the charging stations remaining amount of external battery, could send instructions to the mobile object on when its ready to be used. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a mobile lawn mower.
Regarding Claim 16, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management method according to claim 15, wherein: (see rejection above)
Layne further discloses the renewable energy is solar energy. (Layne, see at least Fig. 8 and [0057-0058] wherein a solar powered robotic mower power shed uses battery units and a DC/AC inverter to provide electrical power to a robotic mower.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Shimamura with the teachings of Layne to include the capability of using an external battery for a lawn mower, wherein the external battery is separated from the mobile object and is configured to store power that is to be utilized as a charging station by the mobile object. This could be utilized by the system of Shimamura to use a solar powered charging station, wherein based on the charging stations remaining amount of external battery, could send instructions to the mobile object on when its ready to be used. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a mobile lawn mower.
As per claims 20 and 21, the claim is directed towards a management method for a mobile object that recites similar limitations performed by the management system for a mobile object of claims 10 and 11. The cited portions of Shimamura in view of Layne used in the rejection of claims 10 and 11 teach the same system limitations of claims 20 and 21. Therefore, claims 20 and 21 is rejected under the same rationales used in the rejections of claims 10 and 11as outlined above.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimamura (US 20200356093) in view of Layne (US 20210344299) in further of Jin (CN 102960125).
Regarding Claim 7, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 1, wherein: the processor is configured to execute the program so as to: (see rejection above)
Shimamura in view of Layne does not explicitly disclose acquire weather information from an external server; and generate the instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the weather information.
However, Jin discloses acquire weather information from an external server; and generate the instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the weather information. (Jin, see at least [0054] in a case of rain, the main control box 4 instructs the lawnmower robot to return to the power station along the navigation line to take shelter from the rain, thus ensuring the safe use of the lawnmower robot.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimamura to include the generating instructions for controlling a mobile object based on weather information as taught by Jin with reasonable expectation that this would allow for UAVs/vehicles/mobile objects to take shelter from rain/snow, and therefore would improve the safety of the mobile object.
Regarding Claim 17, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management method according to claim 13, further comprising: (see rejection above)
Shimamura in view of Layne does not explicitly disclose acquiring weather information from an external server; and generating the instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the weather information.
However, Jin discloses acquiring weather information from an external server; and generating the instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the weather information. (Jin, see at least [0054] in a case of rain, the main control box 4 instructs the lawnmower robot to return to the power station along the navigation line to take shelter from the rain, thus ensuring the safe use of the lawnmower robot.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimamura to include the generating instructions for controlling a mobile object based on weather information as taught by Jin with reasonable expectation that this would allow for UAVs/vehicles/mobile objects to take shelter from rain/snow, and therefore would improve the safety of the mobile object.
Claims 8-9 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimamura (US 20200356093) in view of Layne (US 20210344299) in further of Dupray (US 20170069214).
Regarding Claim 8, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 1, wherein: (see rejection above)
Shimamura does not explicitly disclose the processor is configured to execute the program so as to acquire flight information indicating aircraft operation status from an external server; and generate the instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the flight information.
However, Dupray discloses the processor is configured to execute the program so as to acquire flight information indicating aircraft operation status from an external server; and generate the instruction information for controlling the mobile object based on the flight information. (Dupray, see at least [0120] “a processor for determining, based on a detected flight characteristic of the aerial target by the optical system that the aerial target maintains a constant azimuth and elevation relative to the UAV; and a flight control system for maneuvering the UAV to avoid a collision with the aerial target.”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimamura to include the capability of acquiring flight information for an aerial target as taught by Dupray with reasonable expectation that this would allow for UAVs/vehicles/mobile objects to continue traveling without the risk of collision and therefore improve safety.
Regarding Claim 9, Shimamura in view of Layne discloses The management system according to claim 1, wherein: (see rejection above)
Shimamura does not explicitly disclose when communication with the information processing apparatus is unavailable, the mobile object is configured to continue traveling based on the instruction information that has been previously acquired from the information processing apparatus.
However, Dupray discloses when communication with the information processing apparatus is unavailable, the mobile object is configured to continue traveling based on the instruction information that has been previously acquired from the information processing apparatus. (Dupray, see at least [0094] wherein UAVs are capable of operating without RF communications and they follow the last flight plan.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimamura to include of continuing travel even when there is a loss in communication as taught by Dupray with reasonable expectation that this would allow for UAVs/vehicles/mobile objects to continue traveling with the latest information acquired even if there is a loss in communication as this will allow for the vehicle to continue and not stop in the middle of travel and therefore improve safety.
As per claims 18 and 19, the claim is directed towards a management method for a mobile object that recites similar limitations performed by the management system for a mobile object of claims 8 and 9. The cited portions of Shimamura in view of Layne in further view of Dupray used in the rejection of claims 8 and 9 teach the same system limitations of claims 18 and 19. Therefore, claims 18 and 19 are rejected under the same rationales used in the rejections of claims 8 and 9 as outlined above.
Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20170069214 – Various systems, methods, for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) are disclosed. In one aspect, UAVs operation in an area may be managed and organized by UAV corridors, which can be defined ways for the operation and movement of UAVs. UAV corridors may be supported by infrastructures and/or systems supported UAVs operations. Support infrastructures may include support systems such as resupply stations and landing pads. Support systems may include communication UAVs and/or stations for providing communications and/or other services, such as aerial traffic services, to UAV with limited communication capabilities. Further support systems may include flight management services for guiding UAVs with limited navigation capabilities as well as tracking and/or supporting unknown or malfunctioning UAVs.
US 20190265716 – An information processing apparatus of the present invention includes: an acquisition unit configured to acquire the status of a battery mounted on an electric vehicle; and a specifying unit configured to specify a battery replacement place at which the electric vehicle can arrive, on the basis of the status of the battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI whose telephone number is (571) 272-2052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday, 8AM-5PM.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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.
/NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664