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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/18/2026 has been entered.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. No. KR10-2022-0106966, filed on 08/25/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/26/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 03/18/2026. The examiner notes the following adjustments to the claims by the applicant:
Claims 1, 3, 6, 9, 14, 16-18, 20 and 21 are amended;
No additional claims are cancelled (Claims 2 and 15 were previously cancelled);
No new claims added.
Therefore, Claims 1, 3-14 and 16-21 are pending examination, in which Claims 1, 14 and 21 are independent claims.
In light of the instant amendments and arguments:
The objection to Claims 1 and 21 for minor informalities is withdrawn.
Further examination resulted in a new rejection of Claims 1, 3-14 and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, as detailed below.
Claim Objections
Claim 6, 13 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 and 18: The phrase “the specific driving of the driving motion” is grammatically awkward. The examiner suggests changing to “the specific driving motion”.
Claim 13: The phrase “at least one” should preferably be written as “at least on of:”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant presents the following arguments regarding the previous office action:
[A.] To overcome the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection, the applicant has amended each independent claim to include the additional underlined limitations: "the second sensor comprising an optical sensor configured to capture image information of the plurality of casters and the floor…determine whether the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on image analysis of the captured image information of sensing of the second sensor, in response to the mobile robot being moved on to the mat area";
[B.] “Hirata fails to teach a mobile robot including a wheel module having a plurality of casters. Kim is cited for allegedly teaching a mobile robot including a wheel module having a plurality of casters. On page 8, the Office Action recognizes that the combination of Hirata and Kim fail to teach a mobile robot comprising a second sensor located around the plurality casters. Ederfors is cited for allegedly teaching a second sensor located around a plurality of casters.
[C.] Ederfors is directed to detecting angular orientation and rotation behavior of caster wheels relative to a lawnmower body. While Ederfors may monitor changes in wheel rotation or direction, it does not disclose or suggest capturing image information of the casters and the supporting surface to directly determine physical contact between a caster and a floor…independent claim 1 is directed to a fundamentally different sensing principle namely, visual detection of the caster-floor contact condition using captured image data. Ederfors neither teaches nor suggests such a camera-based determination of contact.”
[D.] ”independent claim 1 initiates motion driving only after confirmation, via captured image information, that all front and rear casters are in contact with the mat floor. This contact- verified interlock protects the floor surface and ensures stable caster operation. Hirata, Kim and Ederfors do not disclose or suggest this specific sequence of visual contact determination followed by motion initiation.”.
Applicant's arguments A., B., C. and D. appear to be directed to the instantly amended subject matter. Accordingly, they have been addressed in the rejections below.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, 12-14, 16-17 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Hirata et al. (US 10,279,782 B2, henceforth Hirata) and Koichi et al. (JP 2023048904 A, henceforth Koichi).
Regarding Claim 1, Hirata discloses the limitations: a mobile robot {autonomous driving apparatus 10, Fig. 1, and 610, Fig. 17} comprising: a wheel module {wheels 15, Fig. 2, and driving apparatus control unit 120/520/620, Figs. 3, 15 & 18} being configured to move the mobile robot {controls movement of autonomous driving apparatus from outdoor area to indoor area, Col. 2, Lns. 3-7}, the wheel module including: a plurality of drive wheels {15, Figs. 1&17}; a first sensor {satellite positioning system 230 and area determinator 222, Fig. 15} configured to detect {cleaning mat detectable by “satellite positioning system or a coil”, Col. 20, Lns. 19-23} a mat area {cleaning mat 21, Figs. 1&17}; a second sensor configured to detect whether the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with a floor of the mat area {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, infrared sensors 630 (and area determinator 622), Fig. 18, (which determines whether driving apparatus 10 is present in the cleaning area, Col. 8, Lns. 1-7), and tilt sensor 17, Fig. 18, establishes driving apparatus is oriented with the horizontal cleaning mat, Figs. 1&17; The examiner notes the sensors in this reference are associated with drive wheels; casters and associated sensors are dealt with below in referencing additional prior art}; the second sensor comprising an optical sensor {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, is a camera, Col. 11, Lns. 1-4} configured to capture image information of the plurality of casters {dirt sensor 340 is an imaging sensor directed at a wheel and the near-wheel area, which detects dirt on the vehicle treads, Col. 11, Lns. 1-10}; and a controller {control unit 520, Fig. 15} electrically connected to the wheel module and the first sensor {represented in Fig. 15, with respect to GNSS and control unit 520}, the controller being configured to: generate a control signal to detect in response to recognition that a caster management mode has started {dirty wheel detection (dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator 423, Fig. 15) leads to initiation of cleaning process (S503, Fig. 16), Col. 11, Lns. 16-24}; control the wheel module such that the mobile robot is moved onto the mat area in response to the generated control signal {S502, Fig. 17, involves confirmation driving apparatus is on the cleaning mat, thus the driving apparatus in Fig. 1 has moved onto the cleaning mat as in Fig. 17}; and control the wheel module such that the mobile robot performs driving motion for removing contaminants {“perform the cleaning process”, S3 in Fig. 4 - or S506 in Fig. 16 - which involves selected vehicle movements during cleaning, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61} from the wheels without departing from the mat area during the caster management mode {wheel rotation and driving apparatus movement during cleaning, Col. 5, Lns. 56-62}; and determine whether the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on information of sensing of the second sensor {GNSS 230 (Fig. 15) or infrared sensors 630 (Fig. 18) establish driving apparatus is located on cleaning mat 21, Col. 20, Lns. 19-23; and tilt sensor 17 (Figs. 15 & 18) establishes driving apparatus is oriented with the horizontal cleaning mat, Fig. 17, corresponding to all wheels being grounded on the mat; The examiner notes the sensors in this reference are associated with the wheels, casters and associated sensors are dealt with below in referencing additional prior art}, in response to the mobile robot being moved on to the mat area {S502, Fig. 17, involves confirmation driving apparatus is on the cleaning mat}; start driving motion by the wheel module after determining that the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area {perform cleaning process (S506/S603, Figs. 16 & 19, respectively) after determining driving apparatus in on the cleaning mat (S502/S602, Figs. 16 & 19)}; and control the wheel module such that the mobile robot performs the driving motion {movement of driving apparatus on cleaning mat described in Col. 5, Lns. 56-62} and control the wheel module such that the mobile robot performs the driving motion for removing contaminants from the casters {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, is a camera, Col. 11, Lns. 1-4, which detects the dirt level on the treads of the wheels, Col. 11, Lns. 22-26} without departing from the mat area during the caster management mode {types of movement of robot during cleaning process, suitable for the limited area of the cleaning mat 21 in Fig. 1: varying the speed and direction of rotation, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61, driving apparatus turns around the cleaning mat at a fixed position, Col. 19, Lns. 24-26, and skid-steering, Col. 7, Lns. 8-15}.
Hirata does not appear to recite the limitations: mobile robot comprising: a bottom plate; a wheel module mounted on the bottom plate; the wheel module including: a plurality of casters, the plurality of casters including front casters and rear casters, the front casters being located at a front of the mobile robot on a lower surface of the bottom plate, and the rear casters being located at a rear of the mobile robot on the lower surface of the bottom plate; the second sensor comprising an optical sensor configured to capture image information of the plurality of casters and the floor; and determine whether the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on image analysis of the captured image information of sensing of the second sensor.
However, Koichi explicitly recites limitations: a bottom plate {62, Fig. 3}; a wheel module mounted on the bottom plate {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53, Fig. 5}; and a plurality of casters {34RR, 34RL, 34FR and 34FL, Figs. 3-5}, the plurality of casters including front casters and rear casters {34RR, 34RL, 34FR and 34FL, Figs. 3-5}, the front casters being located at a front of the mobile robot on a lower surface of the bottom plate {34FR and 34FL, Fig. 3}, and the rear casters being located at a rear of the mobile robot on the lower surface of the bottom plate {34RR and 34RL, Fig. 3}; the second sensor comprising an optical sensor configured to capture image information of the plurality of casters and the floor {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 monitors the grounded portion of auxiliary wheel 34RR in Fig. 5}; and determine whether the front casters and the rear casters {34RR, 34RL, 34FR and 34FL, Figs. 3-5} are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on image analysis of the captured image information of sensing of the second sensor {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 monitors the grounded portion of auxiliary wheels (34, Figs. 3-5) as described in ¶31; and “detecting a grounding state of the wheels,”, Abstract}.
Hirata and Koichi are analogous art because they each deal controlling and/or monitoring the motion of an autonomous robot.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Hirata and Koichi before them, to modify the teachings of Hirata to include the teachings of Koichi to detect grounding of a caster wheel {Abstract}.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of the mobile robot of Claim 1, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to: monitor whether the front casters and the rear casters are located within the mat area by the second sensor during the driving motion {with regard to Fig. 19 and Col. 19, Lns. 4-23, the cleaning operation occurs only when the apparatus is on the cleaning mat, as determined by infrared sensors 630 in Fig. 18}; and vary the driving motion {“the cleaning process has an operation selected from the group consisting of an intermittent turn at a fixed position; a turn switching of a direction of the turn; and a turn switching of a speed of the turn.”, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61} based on a result of the monitoring whether the front casters and the rear casters are located within the mat area {driving apparatus turns around the cleaning mat at a fixed position, Col. 19, Lns. 24-26, skid-steering, Col. 7, Lns. 8-15, and varying the speed and direction of rotation, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the driving motion includes at least one of an in-situ rotational motion and a repeated forward and reverse driving motion of the mobile robot such that the mobile robot does not depart from the mat area {“the cleaning process has an operation selected from the group consisting of an intermittent turn at a fixed position; a turn switching of a direction of the turn; and a turn switching of a speed of the turn.”, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 4, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to control the plurality of drive wheels so that each drive wheel of the plurality of drive wheels alternately rotates in a forward direction and a reverse direction {“the cleaning process has an operation selected from the group consisting of an intermittent turn at a fixed position; a turn switching of a direction of the turn; and a turn switching of a speed of the turn.”, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: further comprising contamination detection sensors {dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator, Fig. 15} to detect contaminants on the plurality of casters {dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator 323, Fig. 15 and Col. 11, Lns. 22-26}; and wherein the controller is further configured to generate a signal for starting the caster management mode based on a detection result of the contamination detection sensors {dirty wheel detection (dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator 423, Fig. 15) leads to initiation of cleaning process (S503, Fig. 16), Col. 11, Lns. 16-24}.
Hirata does not appear to recite the limitation: contamination detection sensors located adjacent the plurality of casters.
However, Koichi explicitly recites limitation: contamination detection sensors located adjacent the plurality of casters {an auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 is located adjacent each auxiliary wheel 34, Figs. 3-5}.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 7, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to generate a signal for starting the caster management mode, in response to detection of the contaminants on the casters as the detection result {dirty wheel detection (dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator 423, Fig. 15) leads to initiation of cleaning process (S503, Fig. 16), Col. 11, Lns. 16-24} further comprising a communicator configured to transmit a wireless signal to a control server {Col. 20, Lns. 7-29 discusses wireless communication of the driving apparatus and cleaning mat system with GNSS (Fig. 15) and storage of operating programming on an external computer server; one skilled in the art will appreciate that all communication between autonomous driving apparatus 610 and infrared sensors 630, Fig. 17, (or GNSS, Fig. 15) must be wireless}, in response to detection of the contaminants on the casters as the detection result {dirt determinator 323 uses a dirt detection ratio to determine whether the wheel treads are dirty, Col. 11, Lns. 22-36}, and wherein the controller {driving apparatus control unit 120/520/620, Figs. 3, 15 & 18} is further configured to generate a signal for starting the caster management mode {dirty wheel detection (dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator 423, Fig. 15) leads to initiation of cleaning process (S503, Fig. 16), Col. 11, Lns. 16-24}.
Hirata does not appear to recite the limitations: a communicator configured to transmit a wireless signal to a control server, and wherein the controller is further configured to generate a signal when an execution response corresponding to the wireless signal is received from a manager terminal by the communicator through the control server.
However, Koichi appears to explicitly recite the limitations: a communicator {control unit (¶20) of transport apparatus 1, Fig. 2} configured to transmit a wireless signal {“transport control unit transmitting the ground contact state of the wheel to the control device”, ¶10, via network 90, ¶20} to a control server {warehouse control unit 100, ¶20}, and wherein the controller {control unit (¶20) of transport apparatus 1, Fig. 2, provides wireless communication and drives the wheels of transport apparatus 1, as is inherent for autonomous vehicles} is further configured to generate a signal when an execution response corresponding to the wireless signal is received from a manager terminal {communication interface of warehouse control unit 100 is connected wirelessly to transport apparatus for communicating instructions , ¶30} by the communicator through the control server {receipt of wirelessly sent instructions from warehouse control unit 100, by communication unit of transport device 1, initiates activity by the transport device between remote control, ¶20-21}
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 7, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to vary an execution time of the driving motion according to the detection result of the contamination detection sensors during the caster management mode {Col. 15, Lns. 11-14: “the cleaning mode may be configured to be able to vary the cleaning period of time such as a short-time cleaning mode, a long-time cleaning mode and the like, in accordance with the dirt condition of the wheels 15.”}.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 9, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to: stop the caster management mode based on the detection result of the contamination detection sensors {check cleanliness level and cease cleaning if acceptable, Col. 12, Lns. 43-50}; and control the mobile robot to perform a stored next operation mode by moving to a prior position of the mobile robot before the caster management mode was started {move back indoors after cleaning, Col. 6, Lns. 2-6}.
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to: change a set route to include the mat area when a preset condition is satisfied {dirt sensor 340 is an imaging sensor directed at a wheel and the near-wheel area, which detects dirt on the vehicle treads, Col. 11, Lns. 1-10, and dirt determinator 323 uses a dirt detection ratio to determine whether the wheel treads are dirty, Col. 11, Lns. 22-36; one skilled in the art will appreciate that the cleaning mat can neglected, or simply traveled over without stopping, if the dirt level is determined to be low – thus effectively changing the route of the driving apparatus}; while the mobile robot travels along the set route {when heading indoor, the driving apparatus goes to the cleaning mat rather than heading straight in with dirty wheels, Col. 6, Lns. 3-6}; and control the mobile robot to perform the driving motion when the mobile robot enters the mat area within the set route {driving apparatus turns around the cleaning mat at a fixed position, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61, and varying the speed and direction of Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 12, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the preset condition comprises at least one when the mobile robot arrives at a specific point of interest within the set route {transition from outdoor area to indoor area/, Col. 6, Lns. 3-6}, when an accumulated driving distance of the mobile robot exceeds a threshold distance, when the mobile robot completes a predetermined driving mode, and when a selection signal to add the mat area located near the mobile robot to the set route is received.
Regarding Claim 14, Hirata discloses the limitations: a method for operating {controls movement of autonomous driving apparatus from outdoor area to indoor area, Col. 2, Lns. 3-7} a mobile robot {autonomous driving apparatus 10, Fig. 1, and 610, Fig. 17} that travels using a wheel module {wheels 15, Fig. 2, and driving apparatus control unit 120/520/620, Figs. 3, 15 & 18} including a plurality of drive wheels {15, Figs. 1 & 17}, the method comprising: recognizing, by a controller of the mobile robot {control unit 520, Fig. 15}, that a caster management mode has been started {dirty wheel detection (dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator 423, Fig. 15) leads to initiation of cleaning process (S503, Fig. 16), Col. 11, Lns. 22-25}; detecting {cleaning mat detectable by “satellite positioning system or a coil”, Col. 20, Lns. 19-23 } a mat area {cleaning mat 21, Figs. 1&17} using a first sensor {satellite positioning system 230 and area determinator 222, Fig. 15} of the mobile robot {610, Fig. 17}; moving the mobile robot onto the detected mat area {S502, Fig. 15, involves confirmation driving apparatus is on the cleaning mat, thus the driving apparatus in Fig. 1 has moved onto the cleaning mat as in Fig. 17}; capturing image information {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, is a camera, Col. 11, Lns. 1-4} of the plurality of casters and the mat area {dirt sensor 340 is an imaging sensor directed at a wheel and the near-wheel area, which detects dirt on the vehicle treads, Col. 11, Lns. 1-10} by a second sensor {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, infrared sensors 630 (and area determinator 622), Fig. 18, (which determines whether driving apparatus 10 is present in the cleaning area, Col. 8, Lns. 1-7), and tilt sensor 17, Fig. 18, establishes driving apparatus is oriented with the horizontal cleaning mat, Figs. 1&17; The examiner notes the sensors in this reference are associated with drive wheels; casters and associated sensors are dealt with below in referencing additional prior art}, determine whether the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on information of sensing of the second sensor {GNSS 230 (Fig. 15) or infrared sensors 630 (Fig. 18) establish driving apparatus is located on cleaning mat 21, Col. 20, Lns. 19-23, and tilt sensor 17 (Figs. 15 & 18) establishes driving apparatus is oriented with the horizontal cleaning mat, Fig. 17, corresponding to all wheels being grounded on the mat}, in response to the mobile robot being moved on to the mat area {S502, Fig. 17, involves confirmation driving apparatus is on the cleaning mat}; performing driving motion to remove contaminants on the plurality of casters {after determining driving apparatus is on the cleaning mat, switch to driving mode and begin cleaning operation, Col. 19, Lns. 16-23} after determining that the plurality of casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area {determining driving apparatus is on the cleaning mat, S602 in Fig. 19, and Col. 19, Lns. 9-12}, the performing driving motion comprising: monitoring whether the plurality of casters are located in the mat area during the driving motion {with regard to Fig. 19 and Col. 19, Lns. 9-23, the cleaning operation occurs only when the apparatus is on the cleaning mat, as determined by infrared sensors 630 in Fig. 18}; and varying the driving motion based on a result of the monitoring whether the plurality of casters are located in the mat area during the driving motion {driving apparatus turns around the cleaning mat at a fixed position, Col. 19, Lns. 24-26, skid-steering, Col. 7, Lns. 8-15, and varying the speed and direction of rotation , Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
Hirata does not appear to recite the limitations: a plurality of caster wheels; capturing image information of the plurality of casters and a floor of the mat area by a second sensor, determining whether the plurality of casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on image analysis of the captured image information of the second sensor .
However, Koichi explicitly recites limitations: a plurality of caster wheels {34RR, 34RL, 34FR and 34FL, Figs. 3-5}; capturing image information of the plurality of casters and a floor of the mat area by a second sensor {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53, Fig. 5}, determining whether the plurality of casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 monitors the grounded portion of auxiliary wheel 34RR in Fig. 5} based on image analysis of the captured image information of the second sensor {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 monitors the grounded portion of auxiliary wheels (34, Figs. 3-5) as described in ¶31; and “detecting a grounding state of the wheels,”, Abstract}.
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of the method of Claim 14, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the performing driving motion further comprises performing at least one of an in-situ rotational motion and a repeated forward and reverse driving motion of the mobile robot in a state that the mobile robot does not depart from the mat area {driving apparatus turns around the cleaning mat at a fixed position, Col. 19, Lns. 24-26, skid-steering, Col. 7, Lns. 8-15, and varying the speed and direction of rotation, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitation of the method of Claim 16, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the performing driving motion further comprises rotating the plurality of drive wheels by the controller so that each drive wheel of the plurality of drive wheels alternately rotates in a forward direction and a reverse direction area {driving apparatus turns around the cleaning mat at a fixed position, Col. 19, Lns. 24-26, skid-steering, Col. 7, Lns. 8-15, and varying the speed and direction of rotation, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitation of the method of Claim 14, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: further comprising detecting contaminants on the plurality of casters by contamination detection sensors {dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator, Fig. 15; and Col. 11, Lns. 22-26}; and generating a signal for starting the caster management mode based on a detection result of the contamination detection sensors {dirty wheel detection (dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator 423, Fig. 15) leads to initiation of cleaning process (S503, Fig. 16), Col. 11, Lns. 16-24; see also, Col. 8, Lns. 11-17}.
Hirata does not appear to recite the limitation: contamination detection sensors located adjacent the plurality of casters.
However, Koichi explicitly recites limitation: contamination detection sensors located adjacent the plurality of casters {an auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 is located adjacent each auxiliary wheel 34, Figs. 3-5}.
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitation of the method of Claim 19, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: of a method further comprising varying an execution time of the driving motion according to the detection result of the contamination detection sensors {dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator, Fig. 15; and Col. 11, Lns. 22-26} during the caster management mode {Col. 15, Lns. 11-14: “the cleaning mode may be configured to be able to vary the cleaning period of time such as a short-time cleaning mode, a long-time cleaning mode and the like, in accordance with the dirt condition of the wheels 15.”}.
Regarding Claim 21, Hirata discloses the limitations: a mobile robot {autonomous driving apparatus 10, Fig. 1, and 610, Fig. 17} comprising: a wheel module {wheels 15, Fig. 2, and driving apparatus control unit 120/520/620, Figs. 3, 15 & 18}, the wheel module being configured to move the mobile robot {controls movement of autonomous driving apparatus from outdoor area to indoor area, Col. 2, Lns. 3-7}, the wheel module including: a plurality of drive wheels {15, Figs. 1 and 17}; a first sensor {satellite positioning system 230 and area determinator 222, Fig. 15} configured to detect {cleaning mat detectable by “satellite positioning system or a coil”, Col. 20, Lns. 19-23} a mat area {cleaning mat 21, Figs. 1&17}; contamination detection sensors {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15} to detect contaminants on the plurality of casters {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, is a camera, Col. 11, Lns. 1-4, which detects the dirt level on the treads of the wheels, Col. 11, Lns. 22-26}; a second sensor configured to detect whether the plurality of casters are all in contact with a surface of the mat area {infrared sensors 630 (and area determinator 622), Fig. 18, (which determines whether driving apparatus 10 is present in the cleaning area, Col. 8, Lns. 1-7), and tilt sensor 17, Fig. 18, establishes driving apparatus is oriented with the horizontal cleaning mat, Figs. 1&17; The examiner notes the sensors in this reference are associated with drive wheels; casters and associated sensors are dealt with below in referencing additional prior art}, the second sensor comprising an optical sensor {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, is a camera, Col. 11, Lns. 1-4} configured to capture image information of the plurality of casters {dirt sensor 340 is an imaging sensor directed at a wheel and the near-wheel area, which detects dirt on the vehicle treads, Col. 11, Lns. 1-10}; a controller {control unit 120/520, Fig. 3&15, respectively} configured to: control the first sensor to detect the mat area {cleaning mat detectable by “satellite positioning system or a coil”, Col. 20, Lns. 19-23} when the contamination detection sensors {dirt sensor 340 and dirt determinator, Fig. 15} detect that the degree of contamination of the casters needs caster cleaning and is greater than or equal to a threshold level {dirt determinator 323 uses a dirt detection ratio to determine whether the wheel treads are dirty, Col. 11, Lns. 22-36}; control the wheel module such that the mobile robot is moved onto the mat area in response to the generated control signal {Fig. 16 indicates the driving apparatus is already positioned on the cleaning mat at S502 before wheel cleanliness S503 is initiated, however, Fig. 15 represents all the sensor and control capabilities of the driving apparatus are part of the apparatus, and thus one skilled in the art will appreciated, that dirt detection can occur when the vehicle is not on the mat, as in Fig. 1, and moves to the mat, as in Fig. 17}; determine whether the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on information of sensing of the second sensor {GNSS 230 (Fig. 15) or infrared sensors 630 (Fig. 18) establish driving apparatus is located on cleaning mat 21, Col. 20, Lns. 19-23; and tilt sensor 17 (Figs. 15 & 18) establishes driving apparatus is oriented with the horizontal cleaning mat, Fig. 17, corresponding to all wheels being grounded on the mat; The examiner notes the sensors in this reference are associated with the wheels, casters and associated sensors are dealt with below in referencing additional prior art}, in response to the mobile robot being moved on to the mat area {S502, Fig. 17, involves confirmation driving apparatus is on the cleaning mat}; control the plurality of drive wheels to start the driving motion {“perform the cleaning process”, S3 in Fig. 4 - or S506 in Fig. 16 - which involves selected vehicle movements during cleaning , Col. 3, Lns. 58-61} when the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the surface of the mat area {“it is determined whether or not the autonomous driving apparatus 10 is present in the cleaning area 20 (FIG. 1) by the area determinator 122 (FIG. 3) (Step S2). As the autonomous driving apparatus 10 (FIGS. 1 to 3) has been detected by the cleaning area detector 130, the area determinator 122 determines that the autonomous driving apparatus 10 is present in the cleaning area 20.”, Col. 8, Lns. 1-7}; and control the wheel module such that the mobile robot performs driving motion {movement of driving apparatus on cleaning mat described in Col. 5, Lns. 56-62} for removing contaminants from the casters {dirt sensor 340, Fig. 15, is a camera, Col. 11, Lns. 1-4, which detects the dirt level on the treads of the wheels, Col. 11, Lns. 22-26} without departing from the mat area during the caster management mode based on a result of sensing of the first sensor {types of movement of robot during cleaning process, suitable for the limited area of the cleaning mat 21 in Fig. 1: varying the speed and direction of rotation, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61, driving apparatus turns around the cleaning mat at a fixed position, Col. 19, Lns. 24-26, and skid-steering, Col. 7, Lns. 8-15}.
Hirata does not appear to recite the limitations: a plurality of casters being located on a lower surface of the bottom plate, the plurality of casters including front casters and rear casters; contamination detection sensors located adjacent the plurality of casters; the second sensor comprising an optical sensor configured to capture image information of the plurality of casters and a floor; and determine whether the front casters and the rear casters are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on image analysis of the captured image information of sensing of the second sensor.
However, Koichi explicitly recites limitations: a plurality of casters {34RR, 34RL, 34FR and 34FL, Figs. 3-5} being located on a lower surface of the bottom plate {62, Fig. 3, and 34RR relative to 62 in Fig. 5}, the plurality of casters including front casters and rear casters {34RR, 34RL, 34FR and 34FL, Figs. 3-5}; contamination detection sensors located adjacent the plurality of casters {an auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 is located adjacent each auxiliary wheel 34, Figs. 3-5}; the second sensor comprising an optical sensor {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53, Fig. 5, is an imaging sensor, ¶31} configured to capture image information of the plurality of casters and a floor {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 monitors the grounded portion of auxiliary wheel 34RR in Fig. 5}; and determine whether the front casters and the rear casters {34RR, 34RL, 34FR and 34FL, Figs. 3-5} are all in contact with the floor of the mat area based on image analysis of the captured image information of sensing of the second sensor {auxiliary wheel monitoring sensor 53 monitors the grounded portion of auxiliary wheels (34, Figs. 3-5) as described in ¶31; and “detecting a grounding state of the wheels,”, Abstract}.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Hirata, Koichi and Choi et al. (US 12,004,702 B2, henceforth Choi).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of the mobile robot of Claim 1, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the controller is configured to determine specific driving of the driving motion based on information related to the mat area {selected vehicle movements during cleaning , Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
The combination of Hirata and Koichi does not appear to recite the limitations: wherein driving is based on information including at least one of a shape, a size, and a location of the mat area.
However, Choi appears to explicitly recite the limitation: a mobile robot {Figs. 1-3} wherein driving is based on information including at least one of a shape, a size, and a location of the mat area {“The controller may determine a change in the shape of the mat-type obstacle based on the image of the mat-type obstacle while the main body is climbing the mat-type obstacle.”, Col. 2, Lns. 64-67}.
The combination of Hirata and Koichi along with Choi are analogous art they all deal with controlling a mobile robot including both drive wheels and casters.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Hirata, Koichi and Choi before them, to modify the teachings of Hirata and Koichi to include the teaching of Choi to limit the motion of a robot to a fixed area corresponding to different sized cleaning mat areas {Col. 2, Lns. 64-67}.
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of the method of operating a mobile robot of Claim 14, as discussed supra. In addition, Hirata explicitly recites the limitation: of a method wherein the performing driving motion further comprises determining specific driving of the driving motion based on information related to the mat area {selected vehicle movements during cleaning, Col. 3, Lns. 58-61}.
The combination of Hirata and Koichi does not appear to recite the limitation:
wherein the information includes at least one of a shape, a size, and a location of the mat area.
However, Choi appears to explicitly recite the limitation: a mobile robot {Figs. 1-3} wherein the information includes at least one of a shape, a size, and a location of the mat area {“The controller may determine a change in the shape of the mat-type obstacle based on the image of the mat-type obstacle while the main body is climbing the mat-type obstacle.”, Col. 2, Lns. 64-67}.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Hirata, Koichi and Einecke et al. (US 2015/0198952 A1, henceforth Einecke).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Hirata and Koichi disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. The combination of Hirata and Koichi does not appear to recite the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to: control the wheel module to move the mobile robot to a charging station when a charging signal is generated; and generate a control signal to detect the mat area in response to the mobile robot approaching within a reference distance of the charging station.
However, Einecke appears to explicitly recite the limitation: wherein the controller is further configured to: control the wheel module {control means 15 in Fig. 2; “the propulsion control module 15.3 adapted to generate control signals required for navigating the autonomous lawn mower 2 by means of the propulsion means (motor) 16”, ¶54} to move the mobile robot {3, Fig. 1} to a charging station {3, Fig. 1} when a charging signal is generated {wireless communication between robot 2 and base station 3 via antennas 9, Fig. 1 and ¶47}; and generate a control signal to detect the mat area {cleaning means 8, Fig. 1} in response to the mobile robot approaching within a reference distance {distance between robot 2 and base station 3 in Fig. 1, or alternatively, the distance between the robot 2 during cleaning by cleaning means 8 and the location the robot needs to move to, for charging to begin: “the autonomous lawnmower may continue to a second position for recharging its energy storage means 18 at the base station”, ¶80} of the charging station {sensor cleaning is initiated each time the robot arrives at the base station for charging, ¶22}.
The combination of Hirata and Koichi along with Einecke are analogous art they all deal with control of an autonomous robot.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Hirata, Koichi and Einecke before them, to modify the teachings of the combination of Hirata and Koichi to include the teachings of Einecke to coordinate cleaning and charging of an autonomous robot {¶80}.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD EDWIN GEIST whose telephone number is (703)756-5854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/R.E.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights