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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koch (US20110153117A1) in view of Nakamoto (US20230095687A1).
Regarding claim 1, Koch discloses;
A control system for a machine, comprising:
a machine body (taught as machines, elements 120, such as excavators, backhoes etc. paragraph 0018);
a linkage assembly (shown as an example of an excavator in Fig 1, element 120a, which has a linkage assembly connecting an implement to a body, as is normal in excavators like backhoes);
an implement coupled to the machine body via the linkage assembly (shown as an example of an excavator in Fig 1, element 120a, which has a linkage assembly connecting an implement to a body, as is normal in excavators like backhoes);
an operation console remote from the machine (taught as a remote control device by an external/off-board equipment operator, paragraph 0019); and
a controller in communication with the operation console (taught as each machine, element 120, including controllers/processor, such as element 121, and electronic control modules [ECM], element 125, paragraph 0032), wherein the controller is configured to:
receive one or more signals from the operation console in order to operate the machine in a remote control mode (taught as using commands received from a remote control device/console associated with machine 120, paragraph 0036) and define:
a dig region of the machine (exemplified as a surface mine pit for excavating ore, paragraph 0026, Fig 2); and
a dump region of the machine (taught as a dump location, element 222, Fig 2, paragraph 0026); and
operate the machine in an autonomous mode to dig material from the dig region and dump the material to the dump region (taught as operating machines in autonomous mode, paragraph 0020, including operations for removing, loading and hauling excavated material to a loading area and to a dump location, paragraph 0026).
Koch does not explicitly teach that the operation console enters a vehicle into an autonomous mode such that “receive one or more signals from the operation console to enter the machine into an autonomous mode“. However, Koch does teach, in an embodiment, a dual-mode machine, such that a vehicle may be switched between manual and autonomous modes (paragraph 0022). Furthermore, Koch teaches receiving commands by an off-board equipment operator on a remote control console, which operates the machine in accordance with the registered commands (paragraph 0020). Thus, in combination, one of ordinary skill in the art would combine the commands from a remote console with the designation to perform autonomous mode of operation.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simplify operations and improve response time; having remote controlled switching modes allows for a user/operator to spend less time traveling between an observation point and an autonomous vehicle to implement changes. Furthermore, remote systems allow for remote solutions to detected faults, or respond in hazardous zones, autonomously and increase job efficiency, as suggested in Koch (paragraph 0081).
However, Koch does not explicitly teach; a dig region of the machine, wherein defining the dig region includes: (1) positioning the machine body, the linkage assembly, and the implement of the machine such that the implement contacts one or more first points on a work site and (2) storing those one or more first points relative to the work site; and
a dump region of the machine, wherein defining the dump region includes: (1) positioning the machine body, the linkage assembly, and the implement of the machine such that the implement is positioned at or above one or more second points on a work site and (2) storing those one or more second points relative to the work site.
Nakamoto teaches; a dig region of the machine, wherein defining the dig region includes: (1) positioning the machine body, the linkage assembly, and the implement of the machine such that the implement contacts one or more first points on a work site (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046, or a working area by default, paragraph 0045) and (2) storing those one or more first points relative to the work site (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046); and
a dump region of the machine, wherein defining the dump region includes: (1) positioning the machine body, the linkage assembly, and the implement of the machine such that the implement is positioned at or above one or more second points on a work site (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046) and (2) storing those one or more second points relative to the work site (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define a working and dumping region as taught by Nakamoto in the system taught by Koch in order to improve control of implements. As suggested by Nakamoto, traditional methods, such as rotational sensors, may not be applicable to implements such as grapples or clamshells (paragraph 0003), and thus implementing an operator manual setting of the region for the machine to remember can circumvent such deficiencies.
Regarding claim 2, Koch as modified by Nakamoto discloses;
The control system of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection). Koch further teaches; wherein the controller is configured to monitor the autonomous digging and dumping for one or more notification conditions (taught as monitoring devices, element 121a, part of a processor 121, used to monitor data and subsystems of machines, paragraph 0032), and to provide one or more notifications to the operation console (taught as generating alarms/notifications for a machine operator, manager etc. paragraph 0053).
Regarding claim 3, Koch as modified by Nakamoto discloses;
The control system of claim 2 (see claim 2 rejection). Koch further teaches; wherein, when the controller detects one or more notification conditions during the autonomous digging and dumping, to end the autonomous digging and dumping (taught as, upon detecting an abnormal condition, shut down or disable the machine, paragraph 0023, with communications for commands over a communication network, paragraph 0028).
Regarding claim 4, Koch as modified by Nakamoto discloses;
The control system of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection). Koch further teaches; wherein the controller is configured to receive signals indicative of a position of the implement at [examiner notes that the current phrasing only requires the signals to indicate the position of the implement at those locations, not exclusively or sending a special signal at said locations, and amounts to an intended use] a first edge position and a second edge position for the dig region (taught as subsystems for positioning the machine, such as a GPS, paragraph 0032).
Regarding claim 7, Koch as modified by Nakamoto discloses;
The control system of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection). Koch further teaches; wherein the controller is configured to estimate an amount of material being dug during the operation in the autonomous mode (taught as productivity software configured to determine productivity levels of particular machines, paragraph 0054).
Claim(s) 5, 9-11, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koch (US20110153117A1) as modified by Nakamoto (US20230095687A1) and further in view of Wei (US20160076893A1).
Regarding claim 5, Koch as modified by Nakamoto teaches;
The control system of claim 4 (see claim 4 rejection), and wherein the dig region and the dump region are different shapes (exemplified in the figures, dump location 222 is different from an excavation/dig location 220, paragraph 0026) While Koch does not explicitly suggest that the dump site is “ adjacent to the machine on a work site”, where the dump location is only a matter of mere design choice. One of ordinary skill in the art could easily conceive of the dump location to be closer than what is exemplified in Koch, as there is nothing in Koch that requires that the dump location be in the exemplified place. Designating the location to be elsewhere requires only routine skill in the art. Additionally, since “adjacent” is not further defined in the specification, one can broadly interpret the example in Koch such that the dump location (222) is adjacent [next to] a dig site (220), shown in Fig 2.
However, Koch does not explicitly teach; wherein the first edge position and the second edge position for the dig region are opposite corners of the dig region.
Nakamoto suggests defining swing angles and extension distances to define a region in a circle/rainbow shape (paragraph 0046 and 0048), but does not specifically define opposite corners.
Wei teaches; wherein the first position and the second position for the dig region are opposite corners of the dig region adjacent to the machine on a work site (taught as an operator manually operating the machine along a slot [obstacle or barrier that requires avoidance] to define a map, setting by ends of a slot [based on the vehicle position/adjacent to the machine], paragraph 0033, wherein the shown slots include corner regions of modified terrain in Fig 1).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define specific corner boundaries as taught by Wei in the system taught by Koch in order to improve autonomous navigation. As suggested in Wei, by manually defining a slot, one can update changes in topography (paragraphs 0032-0033). To reiterate, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to modify the more general idea of defining boundaries of a work region as taught by Koch (such as paragraph 0075) and Nakamoto (paragraph 0046) with the manual control/definition of a region defined by corners as taught by Wei in order to update a map more specifically and thus improve autonomous navigation. Furthermore, such modification of a desired region shape would be a matter of simple experimentation to optimize, and one of ordinary skill in the art would think to modify a defined region based on the work to be performed (for example, the shape of a crop field which depends on the topography).
Regarding claim 9, Koch teaches;
A method of operating a machine with an implement, a machine body, and an undercarriage (taught as controlling excavators in a work site, shown as an example of an excavator in Fig 1, element 120a, which has a linkage assembly connecting an implement to a body, as is normal in excavators like backhoes), comprising: when operating in a remote control mode:
defining a dig region (taught as defining zones based on criteria, paragraph 0056),
initiating an autonomous digging and dumping mode (taught as operating machines in autonomous mode, paragraph 0020, including operations for removing, loading and hauling excavated material to a loading area and to a dump location, paragraph 0026;); and
operating in the autonomous digging and dumping mode using the defined dig region and the defined dump region (taught as operating machines in autonomous mode, paragraph 0020, including operations for removing, loading and hauling excavated material to a loading area and to a dump location, paragraph 0026); and
when operating in the autonomous digging and dumping mode, monitoring the machine for one or more notification conditions (taught as monitoring devices, element 121a, part of a processor 121, used to monitor data and subsystems of machines, paragraph 0032), and
when one or more notification conditions are detected, ending the autonomous digging and dumping mode and returning to the remote control mode (taught as, upon detecting an abnormal condition, shut down or disable the machine, and wait for operator/technician input paragraph 0023).
Koch does not explicitly teach that the operation console enters a vehicle into an autonomous mode such that “based on one or more signals from an operator station to enter the machine into an autonomous mode, wherein the operator station is remote from the machine “. However, Koch does teach, in an embodiment, a dual-mode machine, such that a vehicle may be switched between manual and autonomous modes (paragraph 0022). Furthermore, Koch teaches receiving commands by an off-board equipment operator on a remote control console, which operates the machine in accordance with the registered commands (paragraph 0020). Thus, in combination, one of ordinary skill in the art would combine the commands from a remote console with the designation to perform autonomous mode of operation.
However, Koch does not explicitly teach;
rotating the machine body relative to the undercarriage,
defining a dig region, wherein defining the dig region includes
positioning the machine body and the implement such that a portion of the implement is positioned at or above a first edge corner of the dig region,
storing into a memory an implement position at the first edge corner of the dig region, positioning the machine body and the implement such that the portion of the implement is positioned at or above a second edge corner of the dig region, and storing into the memory an implement position at the second edge corner of the dig region;
rotating the machine body relative to the undercarriage; and
defining a dump region, wherein defining the dump region includes
positioning the machine body and the implement such that the portion of the implement is positioned at or above a first end of the dump region,
storing an implement position at the first end of the dump region, positioning the machine body and the implement such that the portion of the implement is positioned at or above a second end of the dump region, and
storing an implement position at the second end of the dump region;
Nakamoto teaches; rotating the machine body relative to the undercarriage (taught as rotating the working implement about an axis, paragraph 0032, Fig 1),
defining a dig region (taught as defining a working area, paragraph 0037), wherein defining the dig region includes
positioning the machine body and the implement such that a portion of the implement is positioned at or above a first edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046, or a working area by default, paragraph 0045),
storing into a memory an implement position at the first edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046),
positioning the machine body and the implement such that the portion of the implement is positioned at or above a second edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046, or a working area by default, paragraph 0045), and
storing into the memory an implement position at the second edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046);
rotating the machine body relative to the undercarriage (indicated in defining a swing angle(s) of the machine, such as demonstrated in Fig 8a-b); and
defining a dump region (taught as a defining a dumping area, paragraph 0037), wherein defining the dump region includes
positioning the machine body and the implement such that the portion of the implement is positioned at or above a first end of the dump region (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046),
storing an implement position at the first end of the dump region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046),
positioning the machine body and the implement such that the portion of the implement is positioned at or above a second end of the dump region taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046, or a working area by default, paragraph 0045), and
storing an implement position at the second end of the dump region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046);
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define a working and dumping region as taught by Nakamoto in the system taught by Koch in order to improve control of implements. As suggested by Nakamoto, traditional methods, such as rotational sensors, may not be applicable to implements such as grapples or clamshells (paragraph 0003), and thus implementing an operator manual setting of the region for the machine to remember can circumvent such deficiencies.
However, Nakamoto does not explicitly teach; defining a first edge corner and a second edge corner.
Wei teaches; defining a first edge corner and a second edge corner (taught as an operator manually operating the machine along a slot [obstacle or barrier that requires avoidance] to define a map, setting by ends of a slot [based on the vehicle position/adjacent to the machine], paragraph 0033, wherein the shown slots include corner regions of modified terrain in Fig 1).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define specific corner boundaries as taught by Wei in the system taught by Koch in order to improve autonomous navigation. As suggested in Wei, by manually defining a slot, one can update changes in topography (paragraphs 0032-0033). To reiterate, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to modify the more general idea of defining boundaries of a work region as taught by Koch (such as paragraph 0075) and Nakamoto (paragraph 0046) with the manual control/definition of a region defined by corners as taught by Wei in order to update a map more specifically and thus improve autonomous navigation. Furthermore, such modification of a desired region shape would be a matter of simple experimentation to optimize, and one of ordinary skill in the art would think to modify a defined region based on the work to be performed (for example, the shape of a crop field which depends on the topography).
Regarding claim 10, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The method of claim 9 (see claim 9 rejection). However, Koch does not explicitly teach; wherein, storing into the memory the implement position at the first edge corner of the dig region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the first edge corner of the dig region, and wherein storing into the memory the implement position at the second edge corner of the dig region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the second edge corner of the dig region
Nakamoto teaches; wherein, storing into the memory the implement position at the first edge corner of the dig region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the first edge corner of the dig region(taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046), and wherein storing into the memory the implement position at the second edge corner of the dig region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the second edge corner of the dig region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define a working and dumping region as taught by Nakamoto in the system taught by Koch in order to improve control of implements. As suggested by Nakamoto, traditional methods, such as rotational sensors, may not be applicable to implements such as grapples or clamshells (paragraph 0003), and thus implementing an operator manual setting of the region for the machine to remember can circumvent such deficiencies.
Regarding claim 11, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The method of claim 10 (see claim 10 rejection). However, Koch does not explicitly teach; wherein, storing into the memory the implement position at the first end of the dump region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the first end of the dump region, and wherein storing into the memory the implement position at the second end of the dump region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the first end of the dump region.
Nakamoto teaches; wherein, storing into the memory the implement position at the first end of the dump region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the first end of the dump region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046), and wherein storing into the memory the implement position at the second end of the dump region includes receiving one or more user inputs when the implement is positioned at the first end of the dump region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define a working and dumping region as taught by Nakamoto in the system taught by Koch in order to improve control of implements. As suggested by Nakamoto, traditional methods, such as rotational sensors, may not be applicable to implements such as grapples or clamshells (paragraph 0003), and thus implementing an operator manual setting of the region for the machine to remember can circumvent such deficiencies.
Regarding claim 14, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The method of claim 9 (see claim 9 rejection). However, Koch does not explicitly teach; wherein the implement is a bucket, and wherein the bucket is coupled to the machine body of the machine by a linkage assembly.
Nakamoto teaches; wherein the implement is a bucket (taught as the working implement being a bucket, paragraph 0036), and wherein the bucket is coupled to the machine body of the machine by a linkage assembly (shown as the working implement, element 24, being attached to a boom, such as in Fig 1, paragraph 0024).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define a working and dumping region as taught by Nakamoto in the system taught by Koch in order to improve control of implements. As suggested by Nakamoto, traditional methods, such as rotational sensors, may not be applicable to implements such as grapples or clamshells (paragraph 0003), and thus implementing an operator manual setting of the region for the machine to remember can circumvent such deficiencies.
Regarding claim 16, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The method of claim 14 (see claim 14 rejection). Koch further teaches; wherein the dump region is a pile (shown as dump location, 222 in Fig 2).
While Koch does not explicitly suggest that the dump site is “adjacent to the machine at a dig site”, where the dump location is only a matter of mere design choice. One of ordinary skill in the art could easily conceive of the dump location to be closer than what is exemplified in Koch, as there is nothing in Koch that requires that the dump location be in the exemplified place. Designating the location to be elsewhere requires only routine skill in the art. Additionally, since “adjacent” is not further defined in the specification, one can broadly interpret the example in Koch such that the dump location (222) is adjacent [next to] a dig site (220), shown in Fig 2. Furthermore, Nakamoto shows that the working implement system is within reach of a haul truck, such as in Fig 8a-b.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koch (US20110153117A1) as modified by Nakamoto (US20230095687A1) and Wei (US20160076893A1), and further as evidenced by How to Safely Load and Unload a Dump Truck | NationalBlackGuide.com (August 3 2021) and Don’t Overlook These Dump Truck Safety Suggestions | Harbor Truck and Van (September 29 2013).
Regarding claim 6, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The control system of claim 4 (see claim 4 rejection), wherein the controller is configured to receive signals indicative of a position of the implement at a first edge position and an second edge position for the dump region (taught as subsystems for positioning the machine, such as a GPS, paragraph 0032, and defining boundaries [edges] for controlling the behavior of machines with designated areas, paragraph 0076).
While Koch does not explicitly suggest that the dump site is “ adjacent to the machine on a work site”, where the dump location is only a matter of mere design choice. One of ordinary skill in the art could easily conceive of the dump location to be closer than what is exemplified in Koch, as there is nothing in Koch that requires that the dump location be in the exemplified place. Designating the location to be elsewhere requires only routine skill in the art. Additionally, since “adjacent” is not further defined in the specification, one can broadly interpret the example in Koch such that the dump location (222) is adjacent [next to] a dig site (220), shown in Fig 2.
However, neither Koch does not explicitly teach; Wherein the dump region extends linearly from a front portion of a bed of a haul truck to a rear portion of the bed of the haul truck along a midline of the bed of the haul truck, and wherein the dig region is arced between a left edge of the dig region and a right edge of the dig region.
Nakamoto teaches; and wherein the dig region is arced between a left edge of the dig region and a right edge of the dig region (shown in Fig 8a, where the excavator pivots the body along t-the dig site to the dump truck; the pivot showing an effective arc over the dig region, and corresponds to the positioning in the instant application, for example, shown in Fig 2b [shown below, side by side for convenience]).
PNG
media_image1.png
324
422
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
226
340
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1:Left; Side by Side view comparison of; Left; Fig 2B of instant application, and Right; Fig 8a of Nakamoto
While Nakamoto does not explicitly teach; extends linearly from a front portion of a bed of a haul truck to a rear portion of the bed of the haul truck along a midline of the bed of the haul truck, such behavior is a matter of obvious, good practices of manual versions of the activity. For example, in How to Safely Load and Unload a Dump Truck | NationalBlackGuide.com, it is suggested to maintain a balance when depositing material into a dump truck bed, and start loading from the center, and move side to side to prevent excessive piling in certain areas and maintain a balanced weight distribution (pages 2-3 ). This is additionally suggested in Don’t Overlook These Dump Truck Safety Suggestions | Harbor Truck and Van, which also suggests ensuring even loads by starting in the middle of the bed, and loading evenly outwards to fil in empty spots (page 2). Thus, it would be considered an obvious implementation to automate loading of a dump truck bed, by starting from a center position and moving to fill in areas side to side to maintain a balanced load.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koch (US20110153117A1) as modified by Nakamoto (US20230095687A1), and further in view of Ready (US20210148086A1) and as evidenced by SANY (SANYamerica, 2019).
Regarding claim 8, Koch as modified by Nakamoto teaches;
The control system of claim 7 (see claim 7 rejection). However, Koch does not explicitly teach; wherein the implement is a bucket, and wherein when the dump region is full during operation of the machine in the autonomous mode, the controller signals the bucket to be positioned in a lowered position and suspends movement of the bucket.
Nakamoto teaches; wherein the implement is a bucket (taught as a working implement being a bucket, paragraph 0036), and wherein when the dump region is full during operation of the machine in the autonomous mode (taught as detecting whether a haul truck being filled is full, paragraph 0034).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a machine with a bucket and detection of a filled dump area/truck as taught by Nakamoto in the system taught by Koch in order to improve environmental awareness. As suggested in Nakamoto, such a feature allows for alerts to indicate to an operator of the situation that the dump area is full (paragraph 0034), which further allows for the operator to take appropriate action.
However, Nakamoto does not explicitly teach; the controller signals the bucket to be positioned in a lowered position and suspends movement of the bucket.
Ready teaches; wherein the implement is a bucket (shown in Fig 2B), and wherein when the dump region is full during operation of the machine in the autonomous mode, the controller suspends movement of the bucket (taught as halting the transfer of earth when it detects that the loading location is at maximum capacity, paragraph 0178).
While Ready does not explicitly teach “the controller signals the bucket to be positioned in a lowered position“, this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as a safety concern. For example, SANY suggests keeping the bucket low when possible keeps it easier to see and maintain a lower center of gravity, which greatly improves stability.
Claim(s) 12-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koch (US20110153117A1)as modified by Nakamoto (US20230095687A1) and Wei (US20160076893A1), and further in view of Ready (US20210148086A1).
Regarding claim 12, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The method of claim 9 (see claim 9 rejection). However, Koch does not explicitly teach; further comprising an initial step of positioning the machine to a dig site under the remote control mode using one or more cameras on the machine.
Ready teaches; further comprising an initial step of positioning the machine to a dig site under the remote control mode using one or more cameras on the machine (taught as sensors, element 170, including measurement, spatial, imaging and position sensors, shown in Fig 1 as 125, 130, 135, 145 respectively, including different cameras, paragraph 0051, wherein the earth shaping vehicle preforms remotely, semi-autonomously, or fully autonomously, paragraph 0062).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use imaging sensors for remote control as taught in Ready in the system taught by Koch to better control the vehicle. Such a system allows for more accurate control by providing feedback to the operator.
Regarding claim 13, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The method of claim 9 (see claim 9 rejection). However, Koch does not explicitly teach; further comprising an initial step of positioning the machine to a dig site under the remote control mode using a remote console in for a line-of-sight control.
Ready teaches; further comprising an initial step of positioning the machine to a dig site under the remote control mode using a remote console in for a line-of-sight control (taught as the earth shaping vehicle preforms remotely, semi-autonomously, or fully autonomously, paragraph 0062).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use explicitly remote control as taught in Ready in the system taught by Koch to better control the vehicle. Such a system allows for more accurate control by providing feedback to the operator.
Regarding claim 15, Koch as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The method of claim 14 (see claim 14 rejection). However, Koch does not explicitly teach; wherein dump region is a bed of a haul truck, and wherein the method further comprises, when loads from the bucket are approaching an end of the dump region, suspending autonomous digging and dumping to replace the haul truck with a new haul truck, wherein suspending autonomous digging and dumping includes positioning the bucket in a lowered position.
Ready teaches; wherein dump region is a bed of a haul truck (taught as detecting when the maximum carry capacity of a hauling vehicle is reached, paragraph 0178), and wherein the method further comprises, when loads from the bucket are approaching an end of the dump region, suspending autonomous digging and dumping to replace the haul truck with a new haul truck, (taught as halting the transfer of earth when it detects that the loading location is at maximum capacity, paragraph 0178).
While Ready does not explicitly teach “wherein suspending autonomous digging and dumping includes positioning the bucket in a lowered position“, this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as a safety concern. For example, SANY suggests keeping the bucket low when possible keeps it easier to see and maintain a lower center of gravity, which greatly improves stability.
Claim(s) 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ready (US20210148086A1) and further in view of Nakamoto (US20230095687A1) and Wei (US20160076893A1).
Regarding claim 17, Ready discloses;
A digging system (taught as an earth shaping system, element 100), comprising:
a digging machine, including a machine body (taught as an earth shaping vehicle, element 115, including excavation vehicles shown in Figs 2a-b),
a linkage assembly (taught as an excavator having an excavation tool, including a multi-element arm, paragraph 0043, shown in Fig 2b),
a bucket movably coupled to the machine body via the linkage assembly (taught as an excavator having an excavation tool, including a multi-element arm attached to a bucket, paragraph 0043, shown in Fig 2b), one or more cameras or sensors (taught as sensors, element 170, including measurement, spatial, imaging and position sensors, shown in Fig 1 as 125, 130, 135, 145 respectively), and a controller (taught as a controller in the earth shaping vehicle, element 150a, shown in Fig 1); and
an operator station that is remote from the digging machine (taught as an off-unit computer, element 120b), wherein the operator station is in communication with the one or more cameras or sensors and the controller (shown as the network connecting the pm-unit computer connected to the controller 150a, and the off unit computer 120b),
wherein the controller is configured to, in a remote operation mode, receive signals from the operator station to define a dig region and a dump region (taught as receiving a digital file detailing the planned excavation, paragraph 0098, along with signals from a geo-fence region, paragraph 0205); and
wherein the controller is further configured to, in an autonomous operation mode (taught as the earth shaping vehicle preforming remotely, semi-autonomously, or fully autonomously, paragraph 0062), control the machine body, the linkage assembly, and the bucket to dig material from the dig region (taught as a digging routine to excavate earth from a planned hole, paragraph 0104) and to dump material to the dump region (taught as executing a dump routine to release earth from the tool, paragraph 0113, exemplified by carrying earth in a bucket tool to travel from the dig location to a fill location to deposit the earth, paragraph 0144).
While Ready does not explicitly teach that; including an undercarriage, a machine body rotatable relative to the undercarriage, rotating the machine body relative to the undercarriage, the general definition of an excavator invokes the idea of a cab on a rotatable superstructure, as evidenced by Volvo (“Excavators are heavy construction equipment consisting of a boom, arm, bucket, and cab on a rotating superstructure atop an undercarriage with tracks or wheels”).
However, Ready does not explicitly teach;
wherein defining the dig region includes
positioning a portion of the bucket at a first edge corner of the dig region, wherein the first edge corner of the dig region is a far left edge corner of the dig region,
storing into a memory an bucket position at the first edge corner of the dig region,
positioning the portion of the bucket at a second edge corner of the dig region, wherein the second edge corner of the dig region is a near right edge corner of the dig region and
storing into the memory an bucket position at the second edge corner of the dig region, and
wherein defining the dump region includes
positioning the portion of the bucket at a first end of the dump region, wherein the first end of the dump region is a front portion of a bed of a haul truck,
storing a bucket position at the first end of the dump region,
positioning the portion of the bucket at a second end of the dump region, wherein the second end of the dump region is a rear portion of the bed of the haul truck, and
storing a bucket position at the second end of the dump region.
Nakamoto teaches; wherein defining the dig region includes
positioning a portion of the bucket at a first edge corner of the dig region, wherein the first edge [[corner]] of the dig region is a far left edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046, or a working area by default, paragraph 0045),
storing into a memory an implement position at the first edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046),
positioning the portion of the bucket at a second edge corner of the dig region, wherein the second edge [[corner]] of the dig region is a near right edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046, or a working area by default, paragraph 0045), and
storing into the memory a bucket position at the second edge [[corner]] of the dig region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046);
wherein defining the dump region includes
positioning the portion of the bucket at a first end of the dump region, wherein the first end of the dump region is a front portion of a bed of a haul truck (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046),
storing a bucket position at the first end of the dump region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046),
positioning the portion of the bucket at a second end of the dump region, wherein the second end of the dump region is a rear portion of the bed of the haul truck (taught as positioning the working implement at a position/area where a haul truck is or able to receive a payload, paragraph 0046, or a working area by default, paragraph 0045), and
storing a bucket position at the second end of the dump region (taught as, once the working implement is at the position, the operator selecting the position as a border to set the dump/discharge border for the area, and delineating sections of the circular area surrounding the machine as the working area and the dumping area, paragraph 0046).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define a working and dumping region as taught by Nakamoto in the system taught by Koch in order to improve control of implements. As suggested by Nakamoto, traditional methods, such as rotational sensors, may not be applicable to implements such as grapples or clamshells (paragraph 0003), and thus implementing an operator manual setting of the region for the machine to remember can circumvent such deficiencies.
However, Nakamoto does not explicitly teach; defining a first edge corner and a second edge corner.
Wei teaches; defining a first edge corner and a second edge corner (taught as an operator manually operating the machine along a slot [obstacle or barrier that requires avoidance] to define a map, setting by ends of a slot [based on the vehicle position/adjacent to the machine], paragraph 0033, wherein the shown slots include corner regions of modified terrain in Fig 1).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define specific corner boundaries as taught by Wei in the system taught by Koch in order to improve autonomous navigation. As suggested in Wei, by manually defining a slot, one can update changes in topography (paragraphs 0032-0033). To reiterate, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to modify the more general idea of defining boundaries of a work region as taught by Koch (such as paragraph 0075) and Nakamoto (paragraph 0046) with the manual control/definition of a region defined by corners as taught by Wei in order to update a map more specifically and thus improve autonomous navigation. Furthermore, such modification of a desired region shape would be a matter of simple experimentation to optimize, and one of ordinary skill in the art would think to modify a defined region based on the work to be performed (for example, the shape of a crop field which depends on the topography).
Regarding claim 20, Ready as modified by Wei and Elkins teaches;
The system of claim 17 (see claim 17 rejection). Ready further teaches; further comprising one or more haul trucks (taught as loading earth from an excavation vehicle onto a hauling vehicle, paragraph 0144).
Claim(s) 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ready (US20210148086A1) as modified by Nakamoto (US20230095687A1) and Wei (US20160076893A1), and further in view of Koch (US20110153117A1).
Regarding claim 21, Ready as modified by Nakamoto and Wei teaches;
The system of claim 17 (see claim 17 rejection), wherein when operating in the autonomous digging and dumping mode, the controller is configured to monitor the machine for one or more notification conditions.
Koch teaches; wherein when operating in the autonomous digging and dumping mode, the controller is configured to monitor the machine for one or more notification conditions (taught as, upon detecting an abnormal condition, shut down or disable the machine, and wait for operator/technician input paragraph 0023).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor notifications/abnormalities in autonomous modes as taught by Koch in the system taught by Ready in order to improve performance. Having such checks allows for autonomous shut-downs before potential damage occurs, and further allow for more efficient diagnosis and testing, as taught in Koch (paragraph 0023).
Regarding claim 22, Ready as modified by Nakamoto, Wei, and Koch teaches;
The system of claim 21 (see claim 21 rejection). However, Ready does not explicitly teach; wherein, when one or more notification conditions are detected, the controller ends the autonomous digging and dumping mode and returns to the remote control mode.
Koch teaches; wherein, when one or more notification conditions are detected, the controller ends the autonomous digging and dumping mode and returns to the remote control mode (taught as, upon detecting an abnormal condition, shut down or disable the machine, and wait for operator/technician input paragraph 0023).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor notifications/abnormalities in autonomous modes as taught by Koch in the system taught by Ready in order to improve performance. Having such checks allows for autonomous shut-downs before potential damage occurs, and further allow for more efficient diagnosis and testing, as taught in Koch (paragraph 0023).
Response to Arguments
The applicant asserts that, based on the interview conducted 02/19/2026, the rejections should be overcome, based on an agreement that the ordering of the cited references should have been reversed.
With regards the interview conducted 02/19/2026, the examiner notes that there was no explicit agreement in the record as to whether the independent claims’ rejections should be overcome. The interview summary provided by the examiner indicates that, pending exact language and arguments, definition of a dump region based on using the explicit corners of the dump truck bed t to get a better use of the dump truck volume may overcome the previous rejection. Such arguments were made pertaining to the more specific definitions of the dig/dump areas represented in amended claim 6, and how Nakamoto would potentially lose significant storage volume in the truck when merely using an arc of the machine/linkage assembly/implement to deposit the material into the dump truck bed.
Applicant argues on pages 1-4 of the remarks that the amended material of independent claims 1, 9, and 17 are not covered by Koch and Nakamoto, specifically, that they are silent as to how the dig and dump areas are defined, and thus the 103 rejection should be withdrawn.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As cited in the rejection previously, Nakamoto does teach the idea of positioning a working implement at a position/area and indicating where a haul truck is able to receive a payload [dump region], paragraph 0045, and a working area [dig area] (paragraph 0046). The scope of the independent claims only requires that the machine is positioned [including the linkage assembly and implement] at one or more points to define such regions, and thus the teachings of Nakamoto are seen to sufficiently be included in the scope of the recited claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
For further implements for excavators; US6363632B1,
For further calibration and positioning of excavator/work vehicles; US20220412057A1
For further site planning for work sites; US20200103906A1
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 GABRIEL ANFINRUD whose telephone number is (571)270-3401. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached on (571)270-3969. 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.
/GABRIEL ANFINRUD/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights