DETAILED ACTION
This is a response to Applicant’s submissions filed on 2/18/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/18/2026 regarding changing the word “end” to “edge” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
It is noted that applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In response to Applicant’s argument that paragraph 86 and claim 19 have been amended to resolve the issue of whether the region the mobile body travels within in the fourth (wandering) mode is within the travelable region (Applicant’s Remarks; pp. 13-14), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. In the fourth mode, the mobile body travels within a region that is separated by a certain distance from an edge of a travelable region, therefore, the region could be either inside or outside the travelable region. The disclosure does not define the travelable region. Paragraph 41 discloses a traveling road on which the mobile body can travel, and a region where entry is limited. Paragraphs 62, 68-69, 83-85 and 134-15 disclose a region where entry is restricted. Paragraphs 82 and 133 disclose a region of a specific store the user may enter. Figure 4B similarly discloses only entry restricted regions, a standby space, and a station. Although figure 4B illustrates the mobile body outside these defined regions in the wandering mode, figure 4B does not explicitly disclose that this area is the travelable region. It is unclear if the disclosure is intended to limit the region the mobile travels within, in the fourth mode, to be inside of the travelable region, however, there does not appear to be support for this region to be outside of the travelable region. It is further unclear how the mobile body would reach a region that is outside of the travelable region and separated by a distance. See objection and rejection below.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 86, lines 3-4, it is unclear if “a region” the mobile body travels in is inside of “a travelable region”. It appears that the robot may travel in a region that is a certain distance outside of the edge of a travelable region.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 19, lines 4-5, the limitation “travel within a region that is separated by a certain distance from an edge of a travelable region” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if a region the robot travels in is included in the travelable region. As claimed, “a region” must merely be a certain distance from an edge of “a travelable region”, therefore, “a region” could be outside of “a travelable region”. Because the mobile body travels within both regions, for the purposes of examination, it will be assumed the mobile body travels within a first travelable region that is within a second travelable region, and the first travelable region is separated by a certain distance from an edge of the second travelable region.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 and 20 are allowed.
Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claims 1 and 15-17, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious, when a first mode is set, controlling a mobile body to autonomously perform collision avoidance in a crowd while controlling to travel in front of a specific person based on behavior prediction for the specific person without receiving a destination designated by the specific person and generating a traveling trajectory of the mobile body in which an acceleration and speed in a left-and-right direction orthogonal to a traveling direction of the mobile body are limited more strictly than in a third mode in which the mobile body travels in front of the specific person according to a traveling route toward a designated destination designated by the specific person, in combination with the other elements required by the claim.
Li, in US 2017/0368691, discloses a mobile robot that avoids following sharp turns made by a user and slows down in anticipation of stopping in case the sharp turns were made in response to an obstacle in the path. However, Li does not explicitly disclose limiting the acceleration and speed in directions orthogonal to the traveling direction nor a mode of travelling in front of the user. It would not have been obvious to have applied Li’s teachings to situations in which the mobile robot encounters an obstacle before the user (i.e., the user follows the robot), nor limit the acceleration and speed by different amounts depending on if a destination has been set by the user.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 JOSEPH THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3660. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00AM-3:00PM ET.
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, Erin Bishop can be reached on (571)270-3713. 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.
/JOSEPH THOMPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights