DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to communication filed on 09/29/2025, wherein Claims 1-18 are pending, Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10, 12-13, and 15-16 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Claim objections: Applicant’s arguments with respect to objections to Claims 2-3, 5-7, 9-10 were fully considered and found persuasive. Claim objections are withdrawn.
Regarding 35 USC 101 rejection: Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 filed on 09/29/2025, were fully considered. Applicant argued the amendment. There were no specific arguments regarding the previous rejection.
Regarding 35 USC 103 rejection: Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 filed on 09/29/2025, were fully considered. Applicant argued the amendment. There were no specific arguments regarding the previous rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claims recite an abstract idea as discussed below. This abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application for the reasons discussed below. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the reasons discussed below.
Under Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are
to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the
four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101:
process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. Applied to the present application, the claims belong to one of the statutory classes of a process (method Claim 1) and a product (apparatus Claims 15 and 16).
Step 2A of the 2019 Guidance is divided into two Prongs. Prong 1 requires the
examiner to determine if the claims recite an abstract idea, and further requires that
the abstract idea belongs to one of three enumerated groupings: mathematical
concepts, mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activity.
Independent Claim 1 is copied below, with the limitations belonging to an
abstract idea highlighted in bold; the remaining limitations are ''additional elements''.
A method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, wherein the infrastructure sensor system has a plurality of infrastructure sensors arranged on a shared mounting device, the method comprising the following steps:
transmitting data by each respective infrastructure sensor of at least one of the infrastructure sensors to a sway estimation module, wherein the data include:
pre-processed data including environmental information determined by the respective infrastructure sensor, and/or current measurement data including raw data detected by the respective infrastructure sensor;
processing the transmitted data, and determining from the processed transmitted data, using the sway estimation module, a motion function for the mounting device;
ascertaining, using the sway estimation module, correction information based on the motion function; and
providing the correction information and/or the motion function,
wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and
the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device,
the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor.
Under Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the bold portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exception. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping that covers mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations).
For example, the steps of “processing the transmitted data, and determining from the processed transmitted data, using the sway estimation module, a motion function for the mounting device” and “ascertaining, using the sway estimation module, correction information based on the motion function” are treated by the Examiner as belonging to mathematical concept grouping.
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claims 2-14.
Prong 2 of Step 2A of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine if the claims recite additional elements or a combination of additional elements which integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. This requires additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the abstract idea in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the abstract idea, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea.
The above claims comprise the following additional elements:
Claim 1:
“infrastructure sensor system”, “infrastructure sensors”, “shared mounting device”, “sway estimation module”, “transmitting data by each respective infrastructure sensor of at least one of the infrastructure sensors to a sway estimation module”, “providing the correction information and/or the motion function”, “strain sensor”, “the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device”, and “the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
Claim 15:
“infrastructure sensor system”, “sway estimation module”, “communication unit”, “infrastructure sensors”, “shared mounting device”, “provide the correction information and/or the motion function”, “strain sensor”, “the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device”, and “the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
Claim 16:
“infrastructure sensor system”, “infrastructure sensors”, “shared mounting device”, “sway estimation module”, “communication unit”, “provide the correction information and/or the motion function”, “strain sensor”, “the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device”, and “the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
In Claim 1, the additional elements in the preamble of “A method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, wherein the infrastructure sensor system has a plurality of infrastructure sensors arranged on a shared mounting device” and the limitations of “transmitting data by each respective infrastructure sensor of at least one of the infrastructure sensors to a sway estimation module, wherein the data include: pre-processed data including environmental information determined by the respective infrastructure sensor, and/or current measurement data including raw data detected by the respective infrastructure sensor”, “providing the correction information and/or the motion function”, “the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device”, and “the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”, are not qualified for a meaningful limitation because they only generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, represent a mere data transmitting step and only adds an insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception. A sensor (generic sensor), shared mounting device (generic mount), sway estimation module (essentially part of the computer), communication unit (generic unit), strain sensor (generic sensor) are generally recited and do not qualify as a particular machine.
Similar limitations that are recited in Claims 15 and 16 (generic sensor, shared mounting device, sway estimation module, strain sensor, and generic communication unit) are also generally recited and/or add extra-solution activities to the judicial exception.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, when considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
Under Step 2B, the above claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generically recited and are well-understood/conventional in a relevant art as evidenced by the prior art of record (Step 2B analysis).
The claims, therefore, are not patent eligible.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-14 and 17-18 provide additional features/steps which are part of an expanded algorithm, so these limitations should be considered part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims (Step 2A, Prong One), recite no additional elements reflecting a practical application (Step2A, Prong Two), and fail a “significantly more” test under the step 2B for the same reasons as discussed with regards to the independent claims.
The dependent claims are, therefore, also ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20250136417A1 to Mosolf et al. (hereinafter Mosolf) in view of US20230084450 to Thode et al. (hereinafter Thode), in further view of US20220227578A1 to Kiyokawa (hereinafter Kiyokawa), in further view of US20210003464 to Kitching et al. (hereinafter Kitching), and in further view of US20210122615 to Rauscher et al. (hereinafter Rauscher).
Regarding Claim 1: Mosolf discloses:
“A method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, wherein the infrastructure sensor system has a plurality of infrastructure sensors” (Fig. 1 – sensors 210, 220, 410, 510, and 610 – i.e. plurality of infrastructure sensors, added by examiner; see also paras 0070, 0076, 0079, 0083, and 0085)
“arranged on a shared mounting device” (Fig. 1, counter boom GA is a shared mounting device, added by examiner, see also para 0070);
“the method comprising the following steps: transmitting data by each respective infrastructure sensor of at least one of the infrastructure sensors to a sway estimation module” (para 0094 – “At least the sensor data and target variables S′_soll are fed (i.e. transmitted, added by examiner) to the determination unit 110 (interpreted as the sway estimation module, added by examiner) ”; see also para 0148).
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the data include: pre-processed data including environmental information determined by the respective infrastructure sensor, and/or current measurement data including raw data detected by the respective infrastructure sensor; processing the transmitted data, and determining from the processed transmitted data, using the sway estimation module, a motion function for the mounting device; ascertaining, using the sway estimation module, correction information based on the motion function; and providing the correction information and/or the motion function, wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Thode discloses:
“wherein the data include: pre-processed data including environmental information determined by the respective infrastructure sensor, and/or current measurement data including raw data detected by the respective infrastructure sensor” (para 0094 – “The materials handling vehicle 102 can further comprise a rack leg imaging module 300 including a camera 304 (i.e. respective infrastructure sensor, added by examiner) (FIG. 2 ) for capturing images such as input images (i.e. pre-processed data/raw data, added by examiner) of rack leg features. The camera 304 can be any device capable of capturing the visual appearance of an object and transforming the visual appearance into an image. Accordingly, the camera 304 can comprise an image 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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Mosolf/Thode combination does not specifically disclose:
“processing the transmitted data, and determining from the processed transmitted data, using the sway estimation module, a motion function for the mounting device; ascertaining, using the sway estimation module, correction information based on the motion function; and providing the correction information and/or the motion function, wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
“processing the transmitted data, and determining from the processed transmitted data, using the sway estimation module, a motion function for the mounting device” (Fig. 5; para 0051 – “The sway detection unit 10 (i.e. sway estimation module, added by examiner) acquires the reference swaying amount X1 repeatedly, and detects an amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 based on time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1 (i.e. transmitted data, added by examiner). The sway detection unit 10 subjects the time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1 to differential processing (i.e. processing the transmitted data, added by examiner) or the like to detect a peak of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. mounting device, added by examiner ) (peak in vibration waveform), and detects the (absolute) value of the reference swaying amount X1 at the peak as the amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1. A peak of swaying of the masts 22 appears at a period of half of the natural period of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. motion function, added by examiner), and in the example shown in FIG. 5, peaks of the swaying of the masts 22 appear at time T1, time T2, time T3, time T4, and time T5. ”);
“ascertaining, using the sway estimation module, correction information based on the motion function and providing the correction information and/or the motion function” (Fig. 7; para 0058 – “FIG. 7 shows a situation in which the travel carriage 21 controlled so as to stop at the second stop position S2 is stopped at a position shifted from the second stop position S2 by a stop position error ΔL. .. It is also possible to take into consideration this stop position error ΔL (i.e. ascertaining correction information, added by examiner) to correct the reference stop position S, which serves as a reference for use in detecting the reference swaying amount X”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa combination does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Kitching discloses:
“wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor” (para 0043 – “the oar sensor may also be of use to measure the strains, stresses and flexions of other similar structures, for example a yacht mast or a pole vaulting pole”)
“arranged on the mounting device” (para 0033 – “The oar sensor 200 in each case includes a body 202 having one or more U-shaped supports 204 adapted to fit and mount the sensor around the shaft of the oar”; para 0039 – “the oar sensor 200 is mounted on the shaft of the oar and can be used to measure the movements of the oar ”) and
“the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device” (Claim 1 - (A sensor for measuring the flex of a pole when exposed to one or more forces (i.e. strain, added by examiner)… which are movable relative to one another when forces act on the pole, such that a signal (i.e. transmitted data, added by examiner) proportional to the relative movement is generated by the sensor); para 0042 – “The output of each sensor can be analysed to determine the flex and movement of the oar (i.e. mounting device, added by examiner) relative to it's “at rest position”. From known parameters of movements of the oar, for example, the amount of flex per kilogram it is possible to calculate the force imparted on the oar at any time.”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate the extend of deflection of the sensor mount with the higher degree of accuracy.
Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching combination does not specifically disclose:
“the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Rauscher discloses:
“the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor” (para 0125 – “Such a sensor system 344 can, for example, comprise deformation sensors such as strain gauges at the steel construction of the crane, for example the lattice structures of the tower 201 or of the boom 202. Alternatively or additionally, accelerometers and/or speed sensors and/or rotation rate sensors can be provided to detect specific movements of structural components such as pitching movements of the boom tip or rotational dynamic effects at the boom 202. Alternatively or additionally, such structural dynamics sensors can also be provided at the tower 201, in particular at its upper section at which the boom is supported, to detect the dynamics of the tower 201. Alternatively or additionally, motion sensors and/or acceleration sensors can be associated with the drivetrains to be able to detect the dynamics of the drivetrains”; para 0126 – “the signals y (t) of the structural dynamics sensors 344 and the pendulum sensor system 60 are fed back to the regulator module 341 (interpreted as the sway estimation module, added by examiner) so that a closed feedback loop is implemented. Said regulator module 341 influences the control signals u (t) (i.e. measurement data, added by examiner) to control the crane drives (i.e. motion function, added by examiner)”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination, as taught by Rauscher, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 2: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the pre-processed data include a position of the respective infrastructure sensor and/or an orientation of the respective infrastructure sensor and/or a motion vector according to a previously performed calibration of the respective infrastructure sensor and/or measurement data of the respective infrastructure sensor”.
However, Thode discloses:
“wherein the pre-processed data include a position of the respective infrastructure sensor and/or an orientation of the respective infrastructure sensor and/or a motion vector according to a previously performed calibration of the respective infrastructure sensor and/or the measurement data of the respective infrastructure sensor” (Fig. 10; para 0077 – “FIG. 10 depicts a schematic illustration of yet another embodiment of the rack leg imaging module system of FIG. 4 including a position of rack leg imaging modules (i.e. position of the respective infrastructure sensor, added by examiner) and a pair of control modules”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 3: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein at least one of the infrastructure sensors of the infrastructure sensor system is configured as an environment sensor including an imaging sensor, and the transmitted data include a first sway estimate which is ascertained using environmental information detected by the environment sensor, wherein the first sway estimate is provided to the sway estimation module and is used in determining the motion function and/or in ascertaining the correction information”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
“wherein at least one of the infrastructure sensors of the infrastructure sensor system is configured as an environment sensor including an imaging sensor” (para 0042 – “As shown in FIG. 3, in the present embodiment, the position detection sensor 11 is an optical distance detection sensor (interpreted as the imaging sensor, added by examiner). The position detection sensor 11 projects detection light D toward a first reflective plate 51, and receives light reflected from the first reflective plate 51”), “and the transmitted data include a first sway estimate which is ascertained using environmental information detected by the environment sensor” (para 0051 – “The sway detection unit 10 acquires the reference swaying amount X1 repeatedly, and detects an amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 based on time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1 (i.e. transmitted data, added by examiner); para 0047 – “The transfer control unit 18 converts the reference swaying amount X1 (interpreted as the first sway estimate, added by examiner) detected by the sway detection unit 10 into a lifting height swaying amount X2 (see FIGS. 4 and 5), which is a swaying amount X of the masts 22 at the lifting height H2 that is indicated by the lifting height information”),
“wherein the first sway estimate is provided to the sway estimation module and is used in determining the motion function and/or in ascertaining the correction information” (para 0047 – “The lifting height swaying amount X2 corresponds to the swaying amount of the lift 24. That is to say, the transfer control unit 18 converts the swaying amount X of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 into the swaying amount of the lift 24. The conversion from the reference swaying amount X1 into the lifting height swaying amount X2 can be made based on, for example, a vibration model that approximates the displacement using a cubic function (i.e. ascertaining the correction information, added by examiner). In this case, the transfer control unit 18 can obtain the lifting height swaying amount X2 from the reference swaying amount X1 based on the following expression (1) X2=X1(H2/H1)3 . . . (1) (i.e. example of the motion function, added by examiner)”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 4: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 3.
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“the processing of the data and the determining of the motion function for the mounting device is performed by the sway estimation module, additionally as a function of the first sway estimation”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
“the processing of the data and the determining of the motion function for the mounting device is performed by the sway estimation module, additionally as a function of the first sway estimation” (Fig. 5; para 0051 – “The sway detection unit 10 (i.e. sway estimation module, added by examiner) acquires the reference swaying amount X1 repeatedly, and detects an amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 based on time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1. The sway detection unit 10 subjects the time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1 to differential processing (i.e. processing the transmitted data, added by examiner) or the like to detect a peak of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. mounting device, added by examiner ) (peak in vibration waveform), and detects the (absolute) value of the reference swaying amount X1 at the peak as the amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1. A peak of swaying of the masts 22 appears at a period of half of the natural period of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. motion function, added by examiner), and in the example shown in FIG. 5, peaks of the swaying of the masts 22 appear at time T1, time T2, time T3, time T4, and time T5. ”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 5: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 3.
Mosolf does not explicitly disclose:
“wherein the environmental information includes the raw data, wherein the sway estimation module determines, based on the raw data, the first sway estimate and/or a second sway estimate, wherein the determination of the motion function for the mounting device is performed by the sway estimation module, additionally as a function of the first sway estimate and/or of the second sway estimate”.
However, Thode discloses:
“wherein the environmental information includes the raw data” (para 0094 – “The materials handling vehicle 102 can further comprise a rack leg imaging module 300 including a camera 304 (FIG. 2 ) for capturing images such as input images (i.e. raw data, added by examiner) of rack leg features. The camera 304 can be any device capable of capturing the visual appearance of an object and transforming the visual appearance into an image. Accordingly, the camera 304 can comprise an image 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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination does not explicitly disclose:
“wherein the sway estimation module determines, based on the raw data, the first sway estimate and/or a second sway estimate, wherein the determination of the motion function for the mounting device is performed by the sway estimation module, additionally as a function of the first sway estimate and/or of the second sway estimate”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
“wherein the sway estimation module determines, based on the raw data, the first sway estimate and/or a second sway estimate, wherein the determination of the motion function for the mounting device is performed by the sway estimation module, additionally as a function of the first sway estimate and/or of the second sway estimate” Fig. 5; para 0051 – “The sway detection unit 10 (i.e. sway estimation module, added by examiner) acquires the reference swaying amount X1 (i.e. first sway estimate, added by examiner) repeatedly, and detects an amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 based on time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1. The sway detection unit 10 subjects the time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1 to differential processing or the like to detect a peak of the swaying of the masts 22 (peak in vibration waveform), and detects the (absolute) value of the reference swaying amount X1 at the peak as the amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1. A peak of swaying of the masts 22 appears at a period of half of the natural period of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. motion function, added by examiner), and in the example shown in FIG. 5, peaks of the swaying of the masts 22 appear at time T1, time T2, time T3, time T4, and time T5. ”; para 0052 – “the transfer control unit 18 derives the lifting height swaying amount X2 (i.e. second sway estimate, added by examiner) by converting the reference swaying amount X1 into the lifting height swaying amount X2. Then, the transfer control unit 18 starts the transfer operation of the transfer apparatus 26”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently using several sway estimations.
Regarding Claim 6: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 3.
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the first sway estimate is determined by optical flow analysis of image data detected by the infrastructure sensor configured as the imaging sensor”.
However, Thode discloses:
“wherein the first sway estimate is determined by optical flow analysis of image data detected by the infrastructure sensor configured as the imaging sensor” (para 0004 – “The camera (i.e. infrastructure sensor configured as an imaging sensor, added by examiner) is secured to the fork carriage assembly and is configured to capture (i) a forks down image of at least a portion of a rack leg positioned in a racking system aisle of the multilevel warehouse racking system, and (ii) a forks-up image of at least a portion of a rack leg positioned in a racking system aisle of the multilevel warehouse racking system… The vehicle position processor is configured to generate a forks-down coordinate X1 of the camera along a horizontal axis from the forks-down image of the rack leg, generate a forks-up coordinate X2 of the camera along a horizontal axis from a forks-up image (i.e. optical flow analysis of image data, added by examiner) of the rack leg captured with the fork carriage assembly at a lift height H1, determine a mast sway offset (i.e. first sway estimate, added by examiner) as a difference between the forks-down coordinate X1 and the forks-up coordinate X2”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently using image data obtained by the imaging sensor.
Regarding Claim 7: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 3.
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the first sway estimate is determined by an analysis of landmarks or point clouds in comparison to a map, which were detected by the infrastructure sensor configured as the imaging sensor”.
However, Thode discloses:
“wherein the first sway estimate is determined by an analysis of landmarks or point clouds in comparison to a map, which were detected by the infrastructure sensor configured as the imaging sensor” (para 0109 – “ The determination of the localized position of the materials handling vehicle 102 can be performed by comparing image data to map data. The map data can be stored locally in the memory as one or more warehouse maps 30, which can be updated periodically, or map data provided by a server or the like”; para 0055 – “The vehicle position processor is configured to generate a forks-down coordinate X1 of the camera along a horizontal axis from the forks-down image of the rack leg, generate a forks-up coordinate X2 of the camera along a horizontal axis from a forks-up image of the rack leg captured with the fork carriage assembly at a lift height H1, determine a mast sway offset as a difference between the forks-down coordinate X1 and the forks-up coordinate X2, determine a horizontally advanced position of the materials handling vehicle with the fork carriage assembly at the lift height H1 using the mast sway offset and a subsequently captured forks-up image of at least a portion of a rack leg positioned in the racking system aisle”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently using image data obtained by the imaging sensor and compare this data with a map.
Regarding Claim 8: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the environmental information includes object features of objects in the environment of the infrastructure sensor system, wherein the object features are provided to the sway estimation module and are used in determining the motion function and/or in ascertaining the correction information”.
However, Thode discloses:
“wherein the environmental information includes object features of objects in the environment of the infrastructure sensor system” (para 0094 – “The camera 304 can be any device capable of capturing the visual appearance of an object (i.e. the environmental information including object features, added by examiner) and transforming the visual appearance into an image. Accordingly, the camera 304 can comprise an image sensor… the term “image” as used herein can mean a representation of the appearance of a detected object. The image can be provided in a variety of machine readable representations”);
“wherein the object features are provided to the sway estimation module and are used in determining the motion function and/or in ascertaining the correction information” (Fig. 11; Abstract – “correlate the detected subsequent rack leg with an expected vehicle position using rack leg spacing, generate an odometry error signal based on a difference between the positions, and update the vehicle odometry-based position using the odometry error signal and/or generated mast sway compensation (interpreted as correction information, added by examiner) to use for end of aisle protection and/or in/out of aisle localization”; para 0128 – “ Rack legs (interpreted as an object, added by examiner) detected by this rack leg imaging module 300R (i.e. infrastructure sensor system, added by examiner) as described herein may compensate for mast sway through a determination of mast sway offset as described in greater detail below with respect to FIG. 11 . A position output of the vehicle 102 with the mast sway compensation may thus be determined by the rack leg imaging module 300R.”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently using image data obtained by the imaging sensor and using the correction information.
Regarding Claim 9: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf further discloses:
“wherein the correction information includes functional parameters of the motion function, wherein using the functional parameters of the motion function, the updated position and the orientation and/or the motion vector for the at least one of the infrastructure sensors is determined” (Fig. 5; para 0102 – “Means 1030 are arranged to update a model (i.e. using the correction information, added by examiner), in particular of matrices A,B characterizing the model, as a function of the pendulum length l, of the position x of the trolley and as a function of the mass m associated with the multiple pendulum (i.e. motion function, added by examiner). Means 1032 are used to update a regulator, determining a matrix of gain factors K′, as a function of the model, in particular of the matrices A, B characterizing the model, and as a function of the pendulum length l (interpreted as using the functional parameters of the motion function, added by examiner). The determination of the variable u_LK, u_DW, u_HW is performed as a function of the updated regulator.”; see also Fig. 6 and para 0105 for the state vector).
Regarding Claim 10: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf further discloses:
“wherein sensor-specific motion vectors are determined as the correction information, wherein using the sensor-specific motion vector, the updated position and/or the orientation for the at least one of the infrastructure sensors is determined” (Fig. 5; para 0102 – “Means 1030 are arranged to update a model (i.e. using the correction information, added by examiner), in particular of matrices A,B characterizing the model, as a function of the pendulum length l, of the position x of the trolley and as a function of the mass m associated with the multiple pendulum (i.e. motion function, added by examiner). Means 1032 are used to update a regulator, determining a matrix of gain factors K′, as a function of the model, in particular of the matrices A, B characterizing the model, and as a function of the pendulum length l (interpreted as using the functional parameters of the motion function, added by examiner). The determination of the variable u_LK, u_DW, u_HW is performed as a function of the updated regulator.”; see also Fig. 6 and para 0105 for the state vector).
Regarding Claim 11: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the correction information is transmitted to at least one of the infrastructure sensors of the infrastructure sensor system so that measurement data of the at least one of the infrastructure sensors can be corrected using the correction information and/or can subsequently be marked as inaccurate”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
“wherein the correction information is transmitted to at least one of the infrastructure sensors of the infrastructure sensor system so that measurement data of the at least one of the infrastructure sensors can be corrected using the correction information and/or can subsequently be marked as inaccurate” (para 0062 – “The sway detection unit 10 obtains (i.e. by way of transmission, added by examiner) a corrected mast reference position A1 based on a detection result of the actual stop position R obtained by the stop-position detection sensor 13… Specifically, by correcting the mast reference position A0 based on a difference between the actual stop position R and the reference stop position S that corresponds to the actual stop position R, the sway detection unit 10 obtains the corrected mast reference position A1”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 12: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf further discloses:
“wherein the correction information is transmitted to a computing unit and the measurement data and/or the environmental information are transmitted from the infrastructure sensors to the computing unit, wherein the computing unit calculates an environmental model of the infrastructure sensor system using the correction information and the measurement data and/or the environmental information” (para 0018 – “Due to the determination of the pendulum angles and the angle of rotation of the trolley (i.e. environmental information, added by examiner), it is possible to derive the load position and to implement a near-real-time regulation (i.e. transmitting the correction information, added by examiner) on the basis of a regulation model representing the crane and the load movement”; see also paras 0038 – 0040, 00102, and Claim 16).
Regarding Claim 13: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 1.
Mosolf further discloses:
“wherein for information exchange between each infrastructure sensor and the sway estimation module, a message is used, which includes the data and the correction information, wherein the correction information includes motion function and/or parameters of the motion function and/or the sensor-specific motion vector and/or the corrected sensor position and/or a corrected sensor orientation; the message includes information relating to the infrastructure sensor including a sensor type of the infrastructure sensor and/or information as to whether the infrastructure sensor has its own sway detection and/or information as to whether the infrastructure sensor requires the correction information” (para 0005 – “a sensor signal (i.e. message, added by examiner) generated by the sensor device for determining the difference in the angle of rotation represents a distance between the sensor device and a section of the trolley cable which section (i.e. sensor position and orientation, added by examiner) is located between a pulley fixed proximal to the trolley boom and the trolley, wherein the difference in the angle of rotation (i.e. data and correction information, added by examiner) is being determined by means of the control unit in dependence on the sensor signal representing the distance”; para 0095 – “it is possible to output a signal ACT to the determination unit 110 by means of the control unit 900, which activates the determination unit (i.e. sway estimation module, added by examiner) and the executed regulation. ”; Claim 2 – “wherein a sensor signal generated by the sensor device for determining the angle of rotation difference represents a distance between the sensor device and a section of the trolley cable located between a pulley fixed proximal to the trolley boom and the trolley; and wherein the angle of rotation difference is determined by means of the control unit in dependence on the sensor signal representing the distance”).
Regarding Claim 14: Mosolf/Thode/Kyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the method according to Claim 13.
Regarding the limitation “wherein the message further includes a signature and further optionally a certificate for validating the signature”, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the signature and optionally the certificate into the message submitting the information from such the sensor to the computer, to ensure that the computing system receives the message or a signal from some particular sensor having the particular features and accordingly the signature, optionally validated by the certificate.
Regarding Claim 15: Mosolf discloses:
“A device for operating an infrastructure sensor system, comprising” (Fig. 1 – sensors 210, 220, 410, 510, and 610 – i.e. plurality of infrastructure sensors, added by examiner; see also paras 0070, 0076, 0079, 0083, and 0085)
“a sway estimation module” (para 0094 – “At least the sensor data and target variables S′_soll are fed to the determination unit 110 (interpreted as the sway estimation module, added by examiner)); and
“a communication unit, which is used to receive data” (para 0223 – “The second computing unit 160 (i.e. communication unit, added by examiner) is communicatively coupled to the first computing unit 150. In step 162, the second computing unit 160 waits for a message from the first computing unit S_1, that is the second computing unit 160 waits for a control telegram from the PLC. The first computing unit 150 sends periodic messages including current control commands and sensor data to the second computing unit 160.”);
“wherein the infrastructure sensors are arranged on a shared mounting device” (Fig. 1, counter boom GA is a shared mounting device, added by examiner, see also para 0070).
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“the data including pre-processed data including environmental information and/or current measurement data including raw data, from infrastructure sensors of the infrastructure sensor system; wherein the sway estimation module is configured to process the data received by the communication unit and to determine therefrom a motion function for the mounting device, to ascertain correction information based on the motion function, and to provide the correction information and/or the motion function, wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Thode discloses:
“the data including pre-processed data including environmental information and/or current measurement data including raw data, from infrastructure sensors of the infrastructure sensor system” (para 0094 – “The materials handling vehicle 102 can further comprise a rack leg imaging module 300 including a camera 304 (i.e. respective infrastructure sensor, added by examiner) (FIG. 2 ) for capturing images such as input images (i.e. pre-processed data/raw data, added by examiner) of rack leg features. The camera 304 can be any device capable of capturing the visual appearance of an object and transforming the visual appearance into an image. Accordingly, the camera 304 can comprise an image 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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Mosolf/Thode combination does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the sway estimation module is configured to process the data received by the communication unit and to determine therefrom a motion function for the mounting device, to ascertain correction information based on the motion function, and to provide the correction information and/or the motion function, wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
“wherein the sway estimation module is configured to process the data received by the communication unit and to determine therefrom a motion function for the mounting device” (Fig. 5; para 0051 – “The sway detection unit 10 (i.e. sway estimation module, added by examiner) acquires the reference swaying amount X1 repeatedly, and detects an amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 based on time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1. The sway detection unit 10 subjects the time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1 to differential processing (i.e. processing the transmitted data, added by examiner) or the like to detect a peak of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. mounting device, added by examiner ) (peak in vibration waveform), and detects the (absolute) value of the reference swaying amount X1 at the peak as the amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1. A peak of swaying of the masts 22 appears at a period of half of the natural period of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. motion function, added by examiner), and in the example shown in FIG. 5, peaks of the swaying of the masts 22 appear at time T1, time T2, time T3, time T4, and time T5. ”),
“to ascertain correction information based on the motion function, and to provide the correction information and/or the motion function” (Fig. 7; para 0058 – “FIG. 7 shows a situation in which the travel carriage 21 controlled so as to stop at the second stop position S2 is stopped at a position shifted from the second stop position S2 by a stop position error ΔL. .. It is also possible to take into consideration this stop position error ΔL (i.e. ascertaining correction information, added by examiner) to correct the reference stop position S, which serves as a reference for use in detecting the reference swaying amount X”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa combination does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Kitching discloses:
“wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor” (para 0043 – “the oar sensor may also be of use to measure the strains, stresses and flexions of other similar structures, for example a yacht mast or a pole vaulting pole”)
“arranged on the mounting device” (para 0033 – “The oar sensor 200 in each case includes a body 202 having one or more U-shaped supports 204 adapted to fit and mount the sensor around the shaft of the oar”; para 0039 – “the oar sensor 200 is mounted on the shaft of the oar and can be used to measure the movements of the oar ”) and
“the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device” (Claim 1 - (A sensor for measuring the flex of a pole when exposed to one or more forces (i.e. strain, added by examiner)… which are movable relative to one another when forces act on the pole, such that a signal (i.e. transmitted data, added by examiner) proportional to the relative movement is generated by the sensor); para 0042 – “The output of each sensor can be analysed to determine the flex and movement of the oar (i.e. mounting device, added by examiner) relative to it's “at rest position”. From known parameters of movements of the oar, for example, the amount of flex per kilogram it is possible to calculate the force imparted on the oar at any time.”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate the extend of deflection of the sensor mount with the higher degree of accuracy.
Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination does not specifically disclose:
“the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Rauscher discloses:
“the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor” (para 0125 – “Such a sensor system 344 can, for example, comprise deformation sensors such as strain gauges at the steel construction of the crane, for example the lattice structures of the tower 201 or of the boom 202. Alternatively or additionally, accelerometers and/or speed sensors and/or rotation rate sensors can be provided to detect specific movements of structural components such as pitching movements of the boom tip or rotational dynamic effects at the boom 202. Alternatively or additionally, such structural dynamics sensors can also be provided at the tower 201, in particular at its upper section at which the boom is supported, to detect the dynamics of the tower 201. Alternatively or additionally, motion sensors and/or acceleration sensors can be associated with the drivetrains to be able to detect the dynamics of the drivetrains”; para 0126 – “the signals y (t) of the structural dynamics sensors 344 and the pendulum sensor system 60 are fed back to the regulator module 341 (interpreted as the sway estimation module, added by examiner) so that a closed feedback loop is implemented. Said regulator module 341 influences the control signals u (t) (i.e. measurement data, added by examiner) to control the crane drives (i.e. motion function, added by examiner)”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination, as taught by Rauscher, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 16: Mosolf discloses:
“An infrastructure sensor system, comprising: a plurality of infrastructure sensors (Fig. 1 – sensors 210, 220, 410, 510, and 610 – i.e. plurality of infrastructure sensors, added by examiner; see also paras 0070, 0076, 0079, 0083, and 0085)
“arranged on a shared mounting device” (Fig. 1, counter boom GA is a shared mounting device, added by examiner, see also para 0070);
“a device for operating an infrastructure sensor system, including: a sway estimation module” (Figs. 4 and 5; (para 0094 – “At least the sensor data and target variables S′_soll are fed to the determination unit 110 (interpreted as the sway estimation module, added by examiner) ”), and
“a communication unit, which is used to receive data” (para 0223 – “The second computing unit 160 (i.e. communication unit, added by examiner) is communicatively coupled to the first computing unit 150. In step 162, the second computing unit 160 waits for a message from the first computing unit S_1, that is the second computing unit 160 waits for a control telegram from the PLC. The first computing unit 150 sends periodic messages including current control commands and sensor data to the second computing unit 160.”).
Mosolf does not explicitly disclose:
“the data including pre-processed data including environmental information and/or current measurement data including raw data, from the infrastructure sensors; wherein the sway estimation module is configured to process the data received by the communication unit and to determine therefrom a motion function for the mounting device, to ascertain correction information based on the motion function, and to provide the correction information and/or the motion function, wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Thode discloses:
“the data including pre-processed data including pre-processed data including environmental information and/or current measurement data including raw data, from infrastructure sensors of the infrastructure sensors” (para 0094 – “The materials handling vehicle 102 can further comprise a rack leg imaging module 300 including a camera 304 (i.e. respective infrastructure sensor, added by examiner) (FIG. 2 ) for capturing images such as input images (i.e. pre-processed data/raw data, added by examiner) of rack leg features. The camera 304 can be any device capable of capturing the visual appearance of an object and transforming the visual appearance into an image. Accordingly, the camera 304 can comprise an image 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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Mosolf/Thode combination does not explicitly disclose:
“the sway estimation module is configured to process the data received by the communication unit and to determine therefrom a motion function for the mounting device, to ascertain correction information based on the motion function, and to provide the correction information and/or the motion function, wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
“wherein the sway estimation module is configured to process the data received by the communication unit and to determine therefrom a motion function for the mounting device” (Fig. 5; para 0051 – “The sway detection unit 10 (i.e. sway estimation module, added by examiner) acquires the reference swaying amount X1 repeatedly, and detects an amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 based on time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1. The sway detection unit 10 subjects the time-series data of the reference swaying amount X1 to differential processing (i.e. processing the transmitted data, added by examiner) or the like to detect a peak of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. mounting device, added by examiner ) (peak in vibration waveform), and detects the (absolute) value of the reference swaying amount X1 at the peak as the amplitude of the swaying of the masts 22 at the detection height H1. A peak of swaying of the masts 22 appears at a period of half of the natural period of the swaying of the masts 22 (i.e. motion function, added by examiner), and in the example shown in FIG. 5, peaks of the swaying of the masts 22 appear at time T1, time T2, time T3, time T4, and time T5. ”),
“to ascertain correction information based on the motion function, and to provide the correction information and/or the motion function” (Fig. 7; para 0058 – “FIG. 7 shows a situation in which the travel carriage 21 controlled so as to stop at the second stop position S2 is stopped at a position shifted from the second stop position S2 by a stop position error ΔL. .. It is also possible to take into consideration this stop position error ΔL (i.e. ascertaining correction information, added by examiner) to correct the reference stop position S, which serves as a reference for use in detecting the reference swaying amount X”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa combination does not specifically disclose:
“wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor arranged on the mounting device, and the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device, the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Kitching discloses:
“wherein the infrastructure sensor system includes at least one strain sensor” (para 0043 – “the oar sensor may also be of use to measure the strains, stresses and flexions of other similar structures, for example a yacht mast or a pole vaulting pole”)
“arranged on the mounting device” (para 0033 – “The oar sensor 200 in each case includes a body 202 having one or more U-shaped supports 204 adapted to fit and mount the sensor around the shaft of the oar”; para 0039 – “the oar sensor 200 is mounted on the shaft of the oar and can be used to measure the movements of the oar ”) and
“the transmitted data include measurement data of the strain sensor representing a bending or deflection of the mounting device” (Claim 1 - (A sensor for measuring the flex of a pole when exposed to one or more forces (i.e. strain, added by examiner)… which are movable relative to one another when forces act on the pole, such that a signal (i.e. transmitted data, added by examiner) proportional to the relative movement is generated by the sensor); para 0042 – “The output of each sensor can be analysed to determine the flex and movement of the oar (i.e. mounting device, added by examiner) relative to it's “at rest position”. From known parameters of movements of the oar, for example, the amount of flex per kilogram it is possible to calculate the force imparted on the oar at any time.”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate the extend of deflection of the sensor mount with the higher degree of accuracy.
Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination does not specifically disclose:
“the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor”.
However, Rauscher discloses:
“the sway estimation module determining the motion function as a function of the measurement data of the strain sensor” (para 0125 – “Such a sensor system 344 can, for example, comprise deformation sensors such as strain gauges at the steel construction of the crane, for example the lattice structures of the tower 201 or of the boom 202. Alternatively or additionally, accelerometers and/or speed sensors and/or rotation rate sensors can be provided to detect specific movements of structural components such as pitching movements of the boom tip or rotational dynamic effects at the boom 202. Alternatively or additionally, such structural dynamics sensors can also be provided at the tower 201, in particular at its upper section at which the boom is supported, to detect the dynamics of the tower 201. Alternatively or additionally, motion sensors and/or acceleration sensors can be associated with the drivetrains to be able to detect the dynamics of the drivetrains”; para 0126 – “the signals y (t) of the structural dynamics sensors 344 and the pendulum sensor system 60 are fed back to the regulator module 341 (interpreted as the sway estimation module, added by examiner) so that a closed feedback loop is implemented. Said regulator module 341 influences the control signals u (t) (i.e. measurement data, added by examiner) to control the crane drives (i.e. motion function, added by examiner)”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching combination, as taught by Rauscher, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 17: Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the infrastructure sensor system according to Claim 16.
Mosolf further discloses:
“and/or as a radar sensor and/or as a lidar sensor” (para 0113 – “On the trolley LK, sensors 214 #1, 216 #1, 214 #2, 216 #2 are arranged for detecting the cable angle φ_1, for example as ultrasonic sensors, LiDAR sensors or other sensors for measuring the distance”).
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“wherein at least one of the infrastructure sensors is configured as an imaging sensor including a camera sensor”.
However, Thode discloses:
“wherein at least one of the infrastructure sensors is configured as an imaging sensor including a camera sensor, and/or as a radar sensor and/or as a lidar sensor” (para 0094 – “The materials handling vehicle 102 can further comprise a rack leg imaging module 300 including a camera 304 (i.e. respective infrastructure sensor, added by examiner) (FIG. 2 ) for capturing images such as input images (i.e. pre-processed data/raw data, added by examiner) of rack leg features. The camera 304 can be any device capable of capturing the visual appearance of an object and transforming the visual appearance into an image. Accordingly, the camera 304 can comprise an image sensor”; para 0113 – “On the trolley LK, sensors 214 #1, 216 #1, 214 #2, 216 #2 are arranged for detecting the cable angle φ_1, for example as ultrasonic sensors, LiDAR sensors or other sensors for measuring the distance”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Thode, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Regarding Claim 18: Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination discloses the infrastructure sensor system according to Claim 16.
Mosolf further discloses:
“wherein the infrastructure sensors include at least one strain sensor” (para 0075 – “The sensor device 620 measures, for example, a tensile force (i.e. strain sensor, added by examiner) exerted on the pulley 22. ”).
Mosolf does not specifically disclose:
“and/or at least one accelerometer and/or at least one eddy current sensor and/or at least one travel sensor”.
However, Kiyokawa discloses:
““and/or at least one accelerometer and/or at least one eddy current sensor and/or at least one travel sensor” (para 0042 – “As shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, in the present embodiment, the sway detection unit 10 includes the position detection sensor 11 that dynamically detects the positions of the masts 22 at the detection height H1 in the route longitudinal direction L. As shown in FIG. 3, in the present embodiment, the position detection sensor 11 is an optical distance detection sensor (i.e. travel sensor, added by examiner)”).
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 method for operating an infrastructure sensor system, disclosed by Mosolf/Thode/Kiyokawa/Kitching/Rauscher combination, as taught by Kiyokawa, in order to estimate sway motion of the object more accurately and efficiently.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US4596155 to Kistler (hereinafter Kistler) discloses isotropic strain sensor and load cell employing same.
US4899599 to Eddens (hereinafter Eddens) discloses strain force sensor means
US20090229378A1 to Kurtz et al. (hereinafter Kurtz) discloses joystick sensor apparatus.
US20050150313 to Curtis et al. (hereinafter Curtis) discloses sensor assembly for measuring weight applied to a vehicle seat.
US20200140239 to Schoonmaker et al. (hereinafter Schoonmaker) discloses system for determining crane status using optical and/or electromagnetic sensors
US20090008351A1 to Schneider et al. (hereinafter Schneider) discloses crane control, crane and method.
US5507188 to Svaty (hereinafter Svaty) discloses structural monitoring system.
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 Lyudmila Zaykova-Feldman whose telephone number is (469)295-9269. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 5:30pm, Monday through Friday.
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, Arleen Vazquez, can be reached at 571-272-2619. 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.
/LYUDMILA ZAYKOVA-FELDMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/LINA CORDERO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857