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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. “The certainty” has no antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 8-10, 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (US 20220101296 A1) in view of Puerini (US 20150012396 A1).
1. An article identification system comprising:
a weight sensor that measures a weight of an article, the weight sensor being installed on a shelf on which the article is placed (fig. 1 element 30); a distance sensor that includes the shelf and a predetermined area in front of the shelf in a measurement range and measures a distance to an object to be measured that is present in the measurement range (fig. 1 40, paragraph 35); and
an article identification device including an information processing device that acquires weight measurement data that is the weight measured with the weight sensor, and distance data that are the distance representing a person present within the measurement range measured with the distance sensor (fig. 1 110, paragraph 38, paragraph 39), wherein, the information processing device is configured to: estimate, based on the weight measurement data when the article is picked up from the shelf, the article picked up from the shelf (fig. 4); calculate, for each of a plurality of picked up estimated articles, a first article picked up position that is an estimated picked up position of the picked up estimated article (fig. 5 s202) obtain, based on the distance data of the person, a second article picked up position based on a position of a predetermined part of the person when the person picks up the article from the shelf (fig. 5 s204);
Nakamura fails to discloses 1) calculating a degree of accuracy indicating a degree of correctness of estimation of the picked up estimated article; 2) calculating a corrected accuracy by correcting the accuracy for each of the picked up estimated articles based on the first article picked up position and the second article picked up position;
3) the identification being based on the corrected accuracy.
However Puerini discloses:
1) calculating a degree of accuracy indicating a degree of correctness of estimation of the picked up estimated article (paragraph 41 confidence score generated)
2) calculating a corrected accuracy by correcting the accuracy for each of the picked up estimated articles based on the first article picked up position and the second article picked up position (paragraph 41 higher confidence score generated based on multiple data input)
3) the identification being based on the corrected accuracy (paragraph 77).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine these teachings with Nakamura by considering confidence of an identification based on collected data. The motivation for the combination is accurate tracking items (paragraph 15, paragraph 29).
Regarding claim 8, Nakamura discloses wherein the information processing device is configured to obtain the position of the person's hand when the person picks up the article from the shelf as the position of the predetermined part of the person (paragraph 60).
Regarding claim 9, Nakamura discloses wherein the information processing device is configured to obtain, when the position of the person's hand cannot be obtained and when a predetermined position other than the position of the person's hand can be obtained as the position of the predetermined part of the person, the predetermined position at which the person picks up the article from the shelf as the second article picked up position (fig. 7 depth sensor detects position based on distance of obstruction; any obstruction will be identified as location).
Regarding claim 10, Nakamura discloses:
wherein the information processing device is configured to identify, when the first article picked up position can be obtained, and when the second article picked up position cannot be obtained, the picked up article based on the first article picked up position (fig. 4).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, 11, 12 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 15-19 are allowed.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art of record fails to disclose in combination with claim 1, wherein the information processing device is configured to: correct the accuracy by subtracting from the accuracy a value obtained by multiplying an absolute value of a difference between the first article picked up position and the second picked up position by a weighting factor. Regarding claim 3, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the information processing device is configured to: when a plurality of simultaneously picked up estimated articles are present among the picked up estimated articles and the obtained second article picked up position is only one, calculate an average of the correction accuracy of the picked up estimated articles included in the simultaneously picked up estimated articles; and identify the picked up estimated article that is not the simultaneously picked up estimated article or the simultaneously picked up estimated article with the highest degree of certainty as the picked up article, based on the average of the correction certainty and the correction certainty of the estimated picked up articles that are not the simultaneously picked up estimated articles. Regarding claim 4, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the information processing device is configured to: when a plurality of simultaneously picked up estimated articles are present among the picked up estimated articles 67 and two second article picked up positions are obtained, calculate an average of the correction accuracy of the picked up estimated articles included in the simultaneously picked up estimated articles; calculate a sum of the correction accuracy of the picked up estimated articles included in the simultaneously picked up estimated articles; identify the picked up article based on the correction certainty of the estimated picked up articles that are not the simultaneously picked up estimated articles, the average of the correction certainty, and the sum of the correction accuracy, identify, when the correction certainty is the highest, the picked up estimated article with the highest certainty that is not the simultaneously picked up estimated article as the picked up article; and identify, when the average of the correction accuracy is the highest, or when the sum of the correction accuracy is the highest, the simultaneously picked up estimated article as the picked up article. Regarding claim 5, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the information processing device is configured to: when a plurality of simultaneously picked up estimated articles are present among the picked up estimated articles and two second article picked up positions based on predetermined parts of two different persons are obtained, calculate an average of the correction accuracy of the picked up estimated articles included in the simultaneously picked up estimated articles; calculate a sum of the correction accuracy of the picked up estimated articles included in the simultaneously picked up estimated articles; identify the picked up article based on the correction certainty of the estimated picked up articles that are not the simultaneously picked up estimated articles, the average of the correction certainty, and the sum of the correction accuracy, identify, when the correction certainty is the highest, the picked up estimated article with the highest certainty that is not the simultaneously picked up estimated article as the picked up article and the person who picked up the identified picked up article; and identify, when the average of the correction accuracy is the highest, or when the sum of the correction accuracy is the highest, the simultaneously picked up estimated article as the picked up article and the person who picked up the identified picked up article. Regarding claim 6, the prior art of record fails to disclose, wherein the information processing device is configured to weight the accuracy before calculating the corrected accuracy. Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the information processing device is configured to identify, when the certainty is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold certainty, the picked up estimated article having a certainty greater than or equal to the threshold certainty as the picked up article without calculating the corrected certainty. Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record fails to disclose: wherein the information processing device is configured to: set a predetermined article picked up possibility range based on the second article picked up position; and exclude the estimated picked up articles that are outside the predetermined article picked up possibility range from the identification target of the picked up article. Regarding claim 12, the prior art of record fails to disclose: wherein the information processing device is configured to: set a predetermined first article picked up possibility candidate range based on the first article picked up position; set a predetermined second article picked up possibility candidate range based on the second article picked up position; set a range based the predetermined first article picked up possibility candidate range and the predetermined second article picked up possibility candidate range as a range of possibility of picking up the article; and exclude the picked up estimated articles that are outside the range of the possibility of picking up the article from the identification target of the picked up article.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art of record fails to disclose: An article acquisition determination system comprising: a plurality of weight sensors for detecting a weight of articles, the articles being installed at a distance from each other on a shelf on which a plurality of articles can be placed; a first detection unit that uses detection results of the weight sensors to detect information including weight distribution on the shelf on which the article is placed; a first determination unit that determines, using the information detected by the first detection unit, a plurality of candidates for an article obtained from the shelf and validity of the candidates for the article; a distance sensor that detects a distance to the articles and persons in a vicinity of the shelf; a second detection unit that uses the detection results in the distance sensor to detect the articles, the persons, and movements of the persons in the vicinity of the shelf; a second determination unit that uses the detection results of the second detection unit to determine which person made the movement toward which article; a third determination unit that uses the results of the first determination unit and the results of the second determination unit to determine which person obtained which article, characterized in that, in a first situation, where a first article is placed in a first region of the shelf in the center of the shelf in one direction, a second region and a third region flanking the first region on both sides in the one direction, a second article is placed in the second region, and a third article is placed in the third region, the first determination unit determines that the plurality of candidate articles includes one second article and one third article, and that the most valid candidate article is the one second article and the next most valid candidate article is the one third article, and when the second determination unit determines that the first person has made a movement toward the third article, the third determination unit determines that the first person has acquired the third article.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art of record fails to disclose: An article acquisition determination system comprising: a plurality of weight sensors for detecting a weight of articles, the articles being installed at a distance from each other on a shelf on which a plurality of articles can be placed; a first detection unit that uses detection results of the weight sensors to detect information including weight distribution on the shelf on which the article is placed; a first determination unit that determines, using the information detected by the first detection unit, a plurality of candidates for an article obtained from the shelf and validity of the candidates for the article; a distance sensor that detects a distance to the articles and persons in a vicinity of the shelf; a second detection unit that uses the detection results in the distance sensor to detect the articles, the persons, and movements of the persons in the vicinity of the shelf;a second determination unit that uses the detection results of the second detection unit to determine which person made the movement toward which article; a third determination unit that uses the results of the first determination unit and the results of the second determination unit to determine which person obtained which article, characterized in that, in the second situation, where a first article is placed in a first area, a second article is placed in a second area, and a third article is placed in a third area, the first area being substantially in the center of the shelf in one direction of the shelf, a second and third areas sandwiching the first area on both sides in the one direction, and where the weight of the second article and the weight of the third article are approximately equal and the weight of the first article is approximately twice the weight of the second article, when the first determination unit determines that the plurality of candidates for the article are one first article, one second article, and one third article, when the most valid candidate article is the one first article and the next most valid candidate articles are the one second article and the one third article and when the second determination unit determines that the first person has made a movement toward the second article and the second person made a movement toward the third article, the third determination unit determines that the first person has obtained the second article and the second person has obtained the third article.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art of record fails to disclose: An article acquisition determination system comprising: a plurality of weight sensors for detecting a weight of articles, the articles being installed at a distance from each other on a shelf on which a plurality of articles can be placed; a first detection unit that uses detection results of the weight sensors to detect information including weight distribution on the shelf on which the article is placed; a first determination unit that determines, using the information detected by the first detection unit, a plurality of candidates for an article obtained from the shelf and validity of the candidates for the article; a distance sensor that detects a distance to the articles and persons in a vicinity of the shelf; a second detection unit that uses the detection results in the distance sensor to detect the articles, the persons, and movements of the persons in the vicinity of the shelf; a second determination unit that uses the detection results of the second detection unit to determine which person made the movement toward which article; a third determination unit that uses the results of the first determination unit and the results of the second determination unit to determine which person obtained which article, characterized in that, in the second situation, where a first article is placed in a first area, a second article is placed in a second area, and a third article is placed in a third area, the first area being substantially in the center of the shelf in one direction of the shelf, a second and third areas sandwiching the first area on both sides in the one direction, and where the weight of the second article and the weight of the third article are approximately equal and the weight of the first article is approximately twice the weight of the second article, when the first determination unit determines that the plurality of candidates for article are one first article, one second article, and one third article, and the most valid candidate articles are the one second article and the one third article, and the next most valid candidate article is 76 the one first article and when the second determination unit determines that the first person made a movement toward the first article, the third determination unit determines that the first person has obtained the first article.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record fails to disclose: An article acquisition determination system comprising: a plurality of weight sensors for detecting a weight of articles, the articles being installed at a distance from each other on a shelf on which a plurality of articles can be placed; a first detection unit that uses detection results of the weight sensors to detect information including weight distribution on the shelf on which the article is placed; a first determination unit that determines, using the information detected by the first detection unit, a plurality of candidates for an article obtained from the shelf and validity of the candidates for the article; a distance sensor that detects a distance to the articles and persons in a vicinity of the shelf; a second detection unit that uses the detection results in the distance sensor to detect the articles, the persons, and movements of the persons in the vicinity of the shelf; a second determination unit that uses the detection results of the second detection unit to determine which person made the movement toward which article; a third determination unit that uses the results of the first determination unit and the results of the second determination unit to determine which person obtained which article, characterized in that, in the second situation, where a first article is placed in a first area, a second article is placed in a second area, and a third article is placed in a third area, the first area being substantially in the center of the shelf in one 77 direction of the shelf, a second and third areas sandwiching the first area on both sides in the one direction, and where the weight of the second article and the weight of the third article are approximately equal and the weight of the first article is approximately twice the weight of the second article, when the first determination unit determines that the plurality of candidates for article is one first article, one second article and one third article, and the most valid candidate article is one first article and the next most valid candidate article is one second article and one third article, and when the second determination unit determines that the first person has made a movement toward the second article and the third article, the third determination unit determines that the first person has obtained the one second article and the one third article.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record fails to disclose: An article acquisition determination system comprising: a plurality of weight sensors for detecting a weight of articles, the articles being installed at a distance from each other on a shelf on which a plurality of articles can be placed; a first detection unit that uses detection results of the weight sensors to detect information including weight distribution on the shelf on which the article is placed; a first determination unit that determines, using the information detected by the first detection unit, a plurality of candidates for an article obtained from the shelf and validity of the candidates for the article; a distance sensor that detects a distance to the articles and persons in a vicinity of the shelf; a second detection unit that uses the detection results in the distance sensor to detect the articles, the persons, and movements of the persons in the vicinity of the shelf;a second determination unit that uses the detection results of the second detection unit to determine which person made the movement toward which article; a third determination unit that uses the results of the first determination unit and the results of the second determination unit to determine which person obtained which article, characterized in that, when the article determined to have the highest validity by the first determination unit does not match the article determined by the second determination unit, and the article determined to have the second highest validity by the first determination unit matches the article determined by the second determination unit, the third determination unit determines that the article determined by the second determination unit has been obtained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Buibas (US 20220230216 A1) discloses identifying an item taken from a shelf based on weight change data and other sensor data (paragraph 429). Kumar (US 11301984 B1) discloses item identification based on multiple types of sensor data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN A MITCHELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3117. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Ryan Zeender can be reached at 571-272-6790. 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.
/NATHAN A MITCHELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627