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 Arguments/Amendments
The amendment filed September 22nd, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1,3-8, 11, 13-18 are currently pending in the Application.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1,3,11,and 13, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20090039819, to Wilson et al. (hereinafter Wilson), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20050271279, to Fujimura et al (hereinafter Fujimura), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20120185095, to Rosensteinet al (hereinafter Rosenstein)
Regarding claim 1, and commensurate claim 11, Wilson teaches A hybrid vehicle, (See at least paragraph [0024] “a walk-and-roll mobile robotic unit, also referred to herein as a robot or vehicle”) comprising: a chassis; (See at least paragraph [0059] “An important feature of the walk and roll robot is that the majority of the mass of the robot is contained within the chassis ”) a plurality of leg-wheel components coupled to the chassis, wherein the plurality of leg- wheel components are configured to be collectively operable to provide wheeled locomotion and walking locomotion; (See at least paragraph [0009] “a mobile robotic unit featuring a main body, a plurality of legs for supporting the main body on and moving the main body in forward and reverse directions about a base surface, and a drive assembly. Each leg includes a respective pivotal hip joint, a pivotal knee joint, and a wheeled foot adapted to roll along the base surface. The drive assembly comprises a motor operatively associated with the hip and knee joints and the wheeled foot for independently driving pivotal movement of the hip joint and the knee joint and rolling motion of the wheeled foot.”)
Wilson does not explicitly disclose, However, Fujimura discloses, at least one sensor configured to receive one or more external commands during a supplementary control mode; (See at least paragraph [Abstract] “Communication is an important issue in man-to-robot interaction. Signs can be used to interact with machines by providing user instructions or commands. Embodiment of the present invention include human detection, human body parts detection, hand shape analysis, trajectory analysis, orientation determination, gesture matching, and the like. Many types of shapes and gestures are recognized in a non-intrusive manner based on computer vision. A number of applications become feasible by this sign-understanding technology, including remote control of home devices, mouse-less (and touch-less) operation of computer consoles, gaming, and man-robot communication to give instructions among others. Active sensing hardware is used to capture a stream of depth images at a video rate, which is consequently analyzed for information extraction.”).
and an external command interpreter configured to: interpret the one or more external commands; (See at least paragraph [0035] “the imaging device 102 is configured to capture image data from which to identify humans and control gestures. In one embodiment, a depth-sensing camera is part of a robotic vision unit and the data processing unit includes a module within the robot's control logic. The processing unit implements techniques further described below to isolate the human gestures and recognize commands for operation.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0011] “a computer based system for man-machine interaction includes an image data pre-processing module, a shape matching module, and a gesture matching module. The image data pre-processing module is for receiving frames of image data comprising human image information. In addition, the image pre-processing module is configured to determine locations of one or more body parts of the human in the frames. This and other information is used by the shape matching module to match a shape of a body part by comparing information associated with the image data with stored shape profiles in a shape database. For this purpose, the shape matching module is coupled to the image data pre-processing module so it may receive the determined locations. Finally, the gesture matching module is also coupled to the image data-preprocessing module and the shape matching module so it may receive shape and location information. The gesture matching module is configured to match a gesture of the body part by comparing gesture attributes of the body part with gesture profiles stored in a gesture database. The gesture attributes include values associated with body part locations and shape information.”).
and direct a vehicle control system, wherein the vehicle control system is configured to control a hybrid vehicle to effectuate the one or more external commands. (See at least paragraph [0046] “a gesture-command matching module accesses the gesture recognition output and matches it to a corresponding machine command, for example, a game control command for a gaming application, a motion command to a humanoid robotic system, a volume control command to a sound system (e.g., in a vehicle), or the like.”).
wherein the supplementary control mode comprises a sign mode (See at least paragraph [Abstract] “ man-to-robot interaction. Signs can be used to interact with machines by providing user instructions or commands.”).
Rosenstein teaches, and a touch mode for an operator external to the vehicle; (See at least paragraph [0073] “ An external surface of the torso 140 may be sensitive to contact or touching by a user, so as to receive touch commands from the user. For example, when the user touches the top surface 146 of the torso 140, the robot 100 responds by lowering a height H.sub.T of the torso with respect to the floor (e.g., by decreasing the height H.sub.L of the leg(s) 130 supporting the torso 140). Similarly, when the user touches the bottom surface 144 of the torso 140, the robot 100 responds by raising the torso 140 with respect to the floor (e.g., by increasing the height H.sub.L of the leg(s) 130 supporting the torso 140). Moreover, upon receiving a user touch on forward, rearward, right or left portions of side surface 148 of the torso 140, the robot 100 responds by moving in a corresponding direction of the received touch command (e.g., rearward, forward, left, and right, respectively). The external surface(s) of the torso 140 may include a capacitive sensor in communication with the controller 500 that detects user contact.”).
wherein the at least one sensor comprises a touch sensor on an external surface of the hybrid vehicle; and (See at least paragraph [0073] “ An external surface of the torso 140 may be sensitive to contact or touching by a user, so as to receive touch commands from the user. For example, when the user touches the top surface 146 of the torso 140, the robot 100 responds by lowering a height H.sub.T of the torso with respect to the floor (e.g., by decreasing the height H.sub.L of the leg(s) 130 supporting the torso 140). Similarly, when the user touches the bottom surface 144 of the torso 140, the robot 100 responds by raising the torso 140 with respect to the floor (e.g., by increasing the height H.sub.L of the leg(s) 130 supporting the torso 140). Moreover, upon receiving a user touch on forward, rearward, right or left portions of side surface 148 of the torso 140, the robot 100 responds by moving in a corresponding direction of the received touch command (e.g., rearward, forward, left, and right, respectively). The external surface(s) of the torso 140 may include a capacitive sensor in communication with the controller 500 that detects user contact.”).
wherein, in the touch mode, the hybrid vehicle is configured to be controlled through the touch sensors. (See at least paragraph [Abstract] “The touch sensor system is responsive to human contact. The controller issues drive commands to the holonomic drive system based on a touch signal received from the touch sensor system.”).
Wilson as modified by Fujimura, and Rosenstein are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, robotic systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wilson to incorporate the teachings Fujimura which include sign based external commands input, and teachings of Rosenstein which includes external-surface touch sensors for providing supplementary external control modes for commanding vehicle motion. Integrating theses known command interfaces into the mobile robot of Wilson would have been predictable design choice to improve operability, without changing the underlying locomotion architecture.
Regarding claim 3, and commensurate claim 13, Wilson as modified by Fujimura, and Rosenstein disclose the claimed features of claim 2 and Wilson does not explicitly disclose, However, Rosenstein discloses, wherein the at least one sensor comprises an image sensor. (See at least paragraph [0015] “a three-dimensional image sensor.”)
Wilson as modified by Rosenstein, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, robotic systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wilson to incorporate the teachings of Rosenstein for the same motivation reasons in claim 1.
Claims 4-8, and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20090039819, to Wilson et al. (hereinafter Wilson), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20050271279, to Fujimura et al (hereinafter Fujimura), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20120185095, to Rosensteinet al (hereinafter Rosenstein), and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 6580978, to McTamaneyet al (hereinafter McTamaney)
Regarding claim 4, and commensurate claim 14, Wilson as modified by Fujimura, and Rosenstein disclose the claimed features of claim 1 and Wilson does not explicitly disclose, However, McTamaney discloses, wherein: the supplementary control mode comprises a follow mode, in the follow mode, the hybrid vehicle is configured to follow a lead vehicle, and the lead vehicle is configured to control operations of the hybrid vehicle. (See [Column 1-2 , Lines 61-22 ]“The present invention is a high-resolution path marking system utilized with inertial navigation systems for land vehicles. The system of the present invention uses radio frequency tags or "beacons" to mark a route to be traversed by manned or unmanned follower vehicles. The RF tags serve as references to correct time and distance traveled dependent errors that accumulate in the follower vehicle's inertial navigation system. The position of each tag is accurately encoded into its memory using a manned path marking vehicle that "proofs" the route in advance of the follower vehicles. Since the inertial navigation system for the path marking vehicle and for the follower vehicles are synchronized at the start of the route, any errors accumulated in the followers' INS with respect to the path marking vehicle are eliminated at the prescribed intervals where the RF tags are placed. The RF tag solution embodied by the present invention offers a superior, low-cost approach to the problem of path marking for manned and unmanned follower vehicles. In the approach herein, the manned path marking vehicle can lay the route days, weeks, or even months in advance. Once the path is marked, it can be reused many times by the follower vehicles without further human intervention. Further, the short-range, ground based RF tags used in this method are less susceptible to jamming, and the tags are covert, i.e. the tags are small and transmit only when interrogated by a secure query signal..”)
Wilson as modified by McTamaney, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, robotic vehicle systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wilson as modified by Fujimura, and Rosenstein to incorporate the teachings of McTamaney for because including master-slave following capabilities will aid in a swarm of robots to work simultaneously therefore the robots have a better odds to complete a variety of tasks.
Regarding claim 5, and commensurate claim 15, Wilson as modified by Fujimura, Rosenstein, and McTamaney disclose the claimed features of claim 4 and Wilson does not explicitly disclose, However, Rosenstein discloses, wherein the at least one sensor comprises an image sensor. (See at least paragraph [0015] “a three-dimensional image sensor.”)
Wilson as modified by Rosenstein, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, robotic systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wilson to incorporate the teachings of Rosenstein for the same motivation reasons in claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, and commensurate claim 16, Wilson as modified by Fujimura, Rosenstein, and McTamaney disclose the claimed features of claim 5 and Wilson does not explicitly disclose, However, McTamaney discloses, wherein the one or more external commands are issued by the lead vehicle by a material deposition. (See [Column 1, Lines 64-67]“ The system of the present invention uses radio frequency tags or "beacons" to mark a route to be traversed by manned or unmanned follower vehicles.”)
Wilson as modified by McTamaney, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, robotic systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wilson to incorporate the teachings of by McTamaney for the same motivation reasons in claim 4.
Regarding claim 7, and commensurate claim 17, Wilson as modified by by Fujimura, Rosenstein, and McTamaney disclose the claimed features of claim 4 and Wilson does not explicitly disclose, However, McTamaney discloses, wherein the at least one sensor comprises a beacon receiver. (See [Column 1, Lines 64-67 ]“"beacons" to mark a route to be traversed by manned or unmanned follower vehicles.”)
Wilson as modified by McTamaney, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, robotic systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wilson to incorporate the teachings of McTamaney for the same motivation reasons in claim 4.
Regarding claim 8, and commensurate claim 18, Wilson as modified by Fujimura, Rosenstein, and McTamaney disclose the claimed features of claim 7 and Wilson does not explicitly disclose, However, McTamaney discloses, wherein the one or more external commands are issued by the lead vehicle by a beacon transmitter. (See [Column 1 , Lines 64-67 ]“ "beacons" to mark a route to be traversed by manned or unmanned follower vehicles.”)
Wilson as modified by McTamaney, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, robotic systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wilson to incorporate the teachings of McTamaney for the same motivation reasons in claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Wesam Almadhrhi whose telephone number is (571) 270-3844. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5PM Mon-Fri Eastern Alt Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anne Antonucci can be reached on (313) 446-6519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WESAM NMN ALMADHRHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666