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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 4, “the contact part” should be changed to –a contact part—. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10-20 are 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:
Regarding claims 1, 18, and 20, the phrase "such as" (claim 1, line 12; claim 18, line 15; claim 20, line 12) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Claims 2-8, 10-17 and 19 are rejected for their dependence on rejected base claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. DE 102021100122 A1 in view of Johansson 4,733,522.
Independent Claim 1: Takahashi discloses a robot used by a method for operating an autonomous mobile green area maintenance robot (10) having a maintenance tool (20), wherein a maintenance height of the maintenance tool is adjustable (via 38), the method comprising the steps of:
a) monitoring whether a criterion for being stuck is satisfied (via 44a1), wherein the criterion for being stuck is characteristic of the green area maintenance robot being stuck (see the boxed text on page 2 and the circled text of page 5 of the attached document);
b) increasing the maintenance height when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied (at S116, see the boxed text of pages 5 and 11 of the attached document); and
after step b), reducing the maintenance height and starting movement of the maintenance tool (at S120) when a reversion criterion is satisfied,
wherein the reversion criterion is that the criterion for being stuck is no longer satisfied for a minimum period of time (when the strength of the area signal and acceleration signal are affirmed then normal routine is initiated again, see S104), as per claim 1.
However, Takahashi fails to disclose wherein the maintenance height is reduced to a value such as that before the criterion for being stuck was satisfied,
wherein the green area maintenance robot has a protection device designed to protect against access into the maintenance tool, and
wherein a protection height of the protection device is adjustable, and wherein step b) comprises increasing the protection height when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied, and wherein the method comprises the step of reducing the protection height after step b), as per claim 1.
Johansson discloses a similar green area maintenance device wherein the maintenance height (of maintenance tool 11) is reduced to a value such as that before height adjustment for an obstacle (col. 4, lns. 7-10),
wherein the green area maintenance device has a protection device (59) designed to protect against access into the maintenance tool (11), and
wherein a protection height of the protection device is adjustable (as seen in Fig. 2 in the dashed line position of tool 11), as per claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reduce the maintenance tool to its previous height after interruption in normal operation, as taught by Johansson, on the maintenance device of Takahashi in order to maintain an even height of cut on the green regardless of operational interruptions. Additionally, while Johannson discloses the manual return to the original height it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to automate this action in Takahashi’s robot since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art.
It can be seen in the resultant combination that in step b) the protection height (of Johansson’s 59) will increase when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied (in Takahashi’s robot), and wherein the method will further comprise the step of reducing the protection height after step b) (as taught by Johansson), as per claim 1.
Dependent Claims 2-8, 10-17: Takahashi further discloses wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) has a locomotion mechanism (16, 16, 26L, 26R) designed for locomotion of the green area maintenance robot,
wherein a contact part (40) of the green area maintenance robot is designed to perform a monitoring movement caused by the locomotion and the condition of being stuck,
wherein the contact part is mounted movably in relation to the locomotion mechanism, and
wherein the criterion for being stuck is that the monitoring movement is caused (see the circled text of page 5 of the attached document), as per claim 2;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) has a locomotive drive system (16, 16, 26L, 26R) designed for locomotion of the green area maintenance robot, and
wherein the criterion for being stuck is that, in spite of operation of the locomotive drive system, the green area maintenance robot is not moving as in the case when it is not stuck (via drive wheel rotation sensor 56 in addition to the acceleration sensor 50 or impeller rotation sensor 58, as described in the boxed text of page 12 of the attached document), as per claim 3;
wherein the monitoring comprises:
sensing locomotion by way of determining a change in distance, position and/or route of the green area maintenance robot (via GPS sensor 54, see the boxed text of page 12 of the attached document) and/or by way of magnetic field measurement (via magnetic sensors 36, see the boxed text on page 7 of the attached document), as per claim 4;
wherein the monitoring comprises global and/or local position determination (GPS sensor 54), as per claim 5;
wherein the maintenance tool (20) is rotationally movable (via motor 22), and
wherein step b) comprises stopping the movement of the maintenance tool when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied (see the circled text of page 11 of the attached document), as per claim 6;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) has a tool movement drive system (22),
wherein the tool movement drive system is designed for moving the maintenance tool (20), and
wherein step b) comprises stopping operation of the tool movement drive system when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied (see the circled text of page 11 of the attached document), as per claim 7;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) has a locomotive drive system (16, 16, 26L, 26R),
wherein the locomotive drive system is designed for locomotion of the green area maintenance robot, and
wherein step b) comprises operating the locomotive drive system to move the green area maintenance robot in an averted locomotive direction (as described in the boxed text of page 8 of the attached document) after the maintenance height has been increased, and after the movement of the maintenance tool has been stopped (see S126, Fig. 10), as per claim 8;
wherein the protection device has the contact part (12b), as per claim 10;
wherein the maintenance height (of maintenance tool 20) and/or the protection height are/is adjustable in a range of from 0 cm to 20 cm (the height of the robot is about 30cm which means the maintenance height is movable in a range from 0-20cm via adjustment device 38 as seen in Fig. 1), as per claim 11;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) is designed such that the adjustment of the maintenance height (via motor 38a) and/or the protection height are/is independent of locomotion (via motors 26L, 26R) of the green area maintenance robot, as per claim 12;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) has a locomotive drive system (16, 16, 26L, 26R) designed for locomotion of the green area maintenance robot,
wherein the green area maintenance robot has a height adjustment drive system (38a) designed to adjust the maintenance height (of maintenance tool 20) and/or the protection height, and
wherein the height adjustment drive system (38a) is independent of the locomotive drive system (26L, 26R), as per claim 13;
wherein the contact part (40) and/or the protection device (12b) are/is arranged in front of the maintenance tool (as seen in Fig. 1, contact part 40 is in front of maintenance tool 20 and protection device 12b extends from the front of the robot to the back and so is also arranged in front of the maintenance tool 20), as per claim 14;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) has a locomotion frame (12a) and/or a covering hood (also 12b),
wherein the locomotion frame and/or the covering hood (12b) are/is arranged above the contact part (40) and/or the maintenance tool (20) and/or the protection device, and
wherein the maintenance height and/or the protection height are/is adjustable in relation to the locomotion frame and/or the covering hood, and/or
wherein the locomotion frame (12a) and/or the covering hood (12b) are/is different from the contact part (40), as per claim 15;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) has a locomotion mechanism (16, 16, 26L, 26R) and the covering hood (12b),
wherein the locomotion mechanism is designed for locomotion of the green area maintenance robot, and
wherein the covering hood is designed to perform a hood movement caused by the locomotion and contact with the hood and is mounted movably in relation to the locomotion mechanism (12b, see the boxed text of page 4 of the attached document),
wherein the method further comprises the steps of:
monitoring whether a hood movement criterion is satisfied, wherein the hood movement criterion is that the hood movement has been caused (see the circled text of page 5 of the attached document), and
moving the green area maintenance robot in an averted locomotion direction and not increasing the maintenance height, when the hood movement criterion is satisfied (as described in the boxed text of page 8 of the attached document), as per claim 16;
wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) is a lawnmowing robot, and/or
wherein the maintenance tool (20) has a lawnmowing tool, and/or
wherein the maintenance height is a lawnmowing height (of 20), as per claim 17.
Independent Claim 18: Takahashi discloses a system for operating an autonomous mobile green area maintenance robot (10) having a maintenance tool (20), wherein a maintenance height of the maintenance tool is adjustable (via 38), the system comprising:
a monitoring device (44a1), wherein the monitoring device is designed to monitor whether a criterion for being stuck is satisfied, wherein the criterion for being stuck is characteristic of the green area maintenance robot being stuck (see the boxed text on page 2 and the circled text of page 5of the attached document);
a height adjustment device (38), wherein the height adjustment device is designed to increase the maintenance height when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied (see S126 in Fig. 10); and
and a tool movement drive system (26),
wherein when a reversion criterion is satisfied (affirmation that the area signal and acceleration signals are changing), the height adjustment device is designed to reduce the maintenance height (at S120) and the tool movement drive system is designed to start movement of the maintenance tool (at S104),
wherein the reversion criterion is that the criterion for being stuck is no longer satisfied, as per claim 18.
However, Takahashi fails to disclose wherein the maintenance height is reduced to a value such as that before the criterion for being stuck was satisfied,
wherein the green area maintenance robot has a protection device designed to protect against access into the maintenance tool, and
wherein a protection height of the protection device is adjustable, and wherein step b) comprises increasing the protection height when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied, and wherein the method comprises the step of reducing the protection height after step b), as per claim 18.
Johansson discloses a similar green area maintenance device wherein the maintenance height (of maintenance tool 11) is reduced to a value such as that before the height adjustment for an obstacle (col. 4, lns. 7-10),
wherein the green area maintenance device has a protection device (59) designed to protect against access into the maintenance tool (11), and
wherein a protection height of the protection device is adjustable (as seen in Fig. 2 in the dashed line position of tool 11), as per claim 18.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reduce the maintenance tool to its previous height after interruption in normal operation, as taught by Johansson, on the maintenance device of Takahashi in order to maintain an even height of cut on the green regardless of operational interruptions. Additionally, while Johannson discloses the manual return to the original height it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to automate this action in Takahashi’s robot since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art.
It can be seen in the resultant combination that in step b) the protection height (of Johansson’s 59) will increase when the criterion for being stuck is satisfied (in Takahashi’s robot), and wherein the method will further comprise the step of reducing the protection height after step b) (as taught by Johansson), as per claim 18.
Dependent Claim 19: Takahashi further discloses wherein the green area maintenance robot (10) carries the monitoring device (44a1) and the height adjustment device (38), as per claim 19.
Response to Arguments
Please see the updated rejection in response to applicant’s claim amendments above. Johansson discloses both the return to an original cutting height after operational interruption and a protection device that, when provided to Takahashi’s robot, will increase in height and then reduce in height, as claimed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alicia M. Torres whose telephone number is 571-272-6997. The examiner’s fax number is 571-273-6997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina R. Fulton, can be reached at (571) 272-7376.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the group receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-3600. The fax number for this Group is 571-273-8300.
/Alicia Torres/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights