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 .
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.
Examiner’s Note
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages, paragraph and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Amendment
The amendment filed on 09/17/25 has been entered into this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-3 and 5-17 has been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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 of this title, 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) 1,5-6 and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwiatkowski (US 20140211999 A1) (herein after Kwiatkowski) [cited in the IDS filed by the applicant] in view of ZHANG et al. (US 2022/0026547 A1) (herein after ZHANG) and further in view of Li et al. (CN 108700665 A)(herein after Li) .
As to claim(s) 1, 5-6 and 14-17, Kwiatkowski discloses a method for determining a current position and/or orientation of an object/a non-transitory computer-readable medium computer program comprising instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations for determining a current position and/or orientation of an object ([0077]: "auxiliary measuring instrument 20"; Fig. 1) relatively to a laser radar (FIG. 1 shows a measuring system 10 according to the invention comprising a laser tracker 11) and for determining a measurement of the object, wherein having a camera system ([0077]: "image detection unit 12") attached to the laser radar [0079], the method comprising:
determining the position and/or orientation of the object relatively to the camera system by:
obtaining one or more images of the object of the camera system (([0079]:
"an image of the auxiliary measuring instrument 20 with the light emitting diodes
22 is detected by the camera 12"),
observing at least three reference targets having a fixed spatial relationship to the object in the one or more images ([0077]: "markings 22 arranged on the auxiliary measuring instrument 20, which markings can be designed as light emitting diodes"; Fig. 1 "),
obtaining the position and/or relative spatial relationship of the at least three reference targets on the object to each other from a storage ([0079]: "the wavelengths of the light emitted by the light emitting diodes 22 is detected ... all luminous points ... can be rapidly detected an localized in the image"), and
calculating the position and/or orientation of the three reference targets relatively to the camera system by using the position and/or relative spatial relationship of the at least three reference targets to each other and the observed at least three reference targets (([0079]: "From the arrangement of the points in the image, it is then possible to determine an orientation of the contact sensing tool 22"));
obtaining a spatial relationship between the camera system and the laser radar from a storage ([0003]: "the laser tracker and the camera are mounted one on top of another in particular in such a way that their positions cannot be altered relative to one another"; Fig. 1); and
calculating the spatial position ([0079]: "laser tracker 11 additionally has a distance measuring unit for determining a distance between the tracker 11 and the reflector 21 "; Fig. 1) of the object ([0079]: "it is then possible to determine an orientation of the contact sensing tool 22 and, in joint consideration with the position of the reflector 21, the exact spatial position and orientation of the contact sensing tool 22 with six degrees of freedom (6-DoF)")
[Note: while each unit configured to perform as claimed may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function, because apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does].
The method wherein the camera system is fixedly attached to a beam steering mechanism, in particular a mirror, of the laser radar [¶0078].
The method wherein the camera system is fixedly mounted to a body of the laser radar such that the spatial relationship between the camera system and the laser radar is fixed [¶0078].
The method determining a current position and/or orientation of a laser positioning system and measuring a physical element of the object [¶0077, 0079].
The system further comprising a camera system and a holder for mounting the camera system to a laser radar, wherein the system preferably comprises the laser radar [¶0077-0079].
Kwiatkowski discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “calculating the spatial position of the object relatively to the laser radar by using the position and/or orientation of the object relatively to the camera system and the spatial relationship between the camera system and the laser radar”.
However, ZHANG from the same field of endeavor discloses a method of calculating the spatial position of the object relatively to the laser radar by using the position and/or orientation of the object relatively to the camera system and the spatial relationship between the camera system and the laser radar (selecting the spatial position relationship of the laser radar and the camera sensor corresponding to the highest total score from the plurality of total scores, to serve as the calibrated position relationship of the laser radar and the camera sensor…¶0058)( to calculate the gray value of a laser radar point conforming to line features after projection as the score, and accumulate the scores of all the laser radar points as the total score; and select the spatial position relationship of the laser radar and the camera sensor corresponding to the highest total score from the plurality of total scores, to serve as the calibrated position relationship of the laser radar and the camera sensor…¶0061).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Kwiatkowski such that calculating the spatial position of the object relatively to the laser radar by using the position and/or orientation of the object relatively to the camera system and the spatial relationship between the camera system and the laser radar; as taught by ZHANG, for the advantages such as: monitor the spatial position relationship online in real time and correct the accumulated errors…¶0003.
Still lacking the limitation such: “measuring a physical element of the object with the laser radar.”
However, Li from the same field of endeavor discloses a system of measuring a physical element of an object with a laser radar [the processor 902 is specifically configured to, when configured to determine whether an object indicated by the object information determined by the laser radar 901 and a target object indicated by the target object information detected by the object detection device are the same object, obtain, according to the object information determined by the laser radar 901, motion information of an object corresponding to the object information in a coordinate system where the laser radar 901 is located…page 4].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG such that measuring the physical element of the object with the laser radar; as taught by Li, for the advantages such as: enables obtaining accurate object information so as to reduce a missed detection situation, performs accurate calculation so as to make accurate internship for obtaining precise obstacle avoidance and path planning.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwiatkowski in view of ZHANG et al. and Li et al. and further in view of Lin et al. (US 20150100162 A1) (herein after Lin).
As to claim(s) 2-3 and 9, Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG and Li discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “the method according to additionally including the step of moving the camera system with a robot from a first position to a second position, wherein the second position is the current position.
The method wherein the current position and/or orientation of the laser radar is determined in reaction to the movement of the camera and the laser radar with the robot, and in particular in reaction to determination that the movement has ended.
The method wherein the camera system comprises a wide lens camera and/or two or more cameras with different fields of view”.
However, Lin from the same field of endeavor discloses a method according to additionally including the step of moving the camera system with a robot [The system 100 further includes a robot assembly 101 having at least one robotic arm 108 and at least one arm actuator 110, such as a motor, for moving the robotic arm 108…¶0017] from a first position to a second position, wherein the second position is the current position [¶0022]; wherein the current position and/or orientation of the laser radar is determined in reaction to the movement of the camera and the laser radar with the robot, and in particular in reaction to determination that the movement has ended [¶0019, 0023]; the camera system comprises a wide lens camera and/or two or more cameras with different fields of view [¶0020].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG and Li such that the method according to additionally including the step of moving the camera system with the robot from the first position to the second position, wherein the second position is the current position; wherein the current position and/or orientation of the laser radar is determined in reaction to the movement of the camera and the laser radar with the robot, and in particular in reaction to determination that the movement has ended; the camera system comprises two or more cameras with different fields of view; as taught by Lin, for the advantages such as: in order to minimizing the cycle time of a manufacturing process.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwiatkowski in view of ZHANG et al. and Li et al. and further in view of ROGERS et al. (US 20210319586 A1) (herein after ROGERS).
As to claim(s) 7-8, Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG and Li discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “The method wherein the at least three reference targets are on the object.
The method wherein the at least three reference targets are attached to the object or are defined by features of the object”.
However, ROGERS from the same field of endeavor discloses a method wherein the at least three reference targets are on the object, wherein the at least three reference targets are attached to the object or are defined by features of the object [The first alignment camera 105a is disposed such that it can see the active reference pod 105 including the first reference target 200 mounted to the first wheel 103a on the same side of the vehicle as the first alignment camera 105a, and the second alignment camera 105b is disposed such that it can see the passive reference pod 110 including the second reference target 210 mounted to the second wheel 103b on the same side of the vehicle as the second alignment camera 105b…¶0045].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG such that the at least three reference targets are on the object; the at least three reference targets are attached to the object or are defined by features of the object; as taught by ROGERS, for the advantages such as: enabling a more accurate and repeatable drive direction measurement.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwiatkowski in view of ZHANG et al. and Li et al. and further in view of Øyvind (EP 3361213 A1) (herein after Øyvind).
As to claim(s) 11, Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG and Li discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “the method wherein at least one of the reference targets comprises of at least three fiducials observable by the camera system and one physical element measurable by the laser radar, in positions known relative to each other”.
However, Øyvind from the same field of endeavor discloses a method the method wherein at least one of the reference targets comprises of at least three fiducials observable by the camera system and one physical element measurable by the laser radar, in positions known relative to each other [@fig.2: At least one camera 5 is attached to the means 3, 4 for determining the position and orientation of the system and at least three fiducials 6 are attached to the means 1 for target observation. A computing unit 7 combines the data from the means 1 for target observation and from the means 3, 4 for determining the position and orientation of the system to determine the position of the target…page 3].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG and Li such that the method wherein at least one of the reference targets comprises of at least three fiducials observable by the camera system and one physical element measurable by the laser radar, in positions known relative to each other; as taught by Øyvind, for the advantages such as: provide target position data with finite precision.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwiatkowski in view of ZHANG et al. and Li et al. and further in view of Raab et al. (US 20060227210 A1) (herein after Raab).
As to claim(s) 13, Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG and Li discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “the method wherein the reference targets are nests, in which spherically mounted fiducials are observable by the camera system, or physical spheres of the same size are measurable by the laser radar”.
However, Raab from the same field of endeavor discloses a method wherein the reference targets are nests, in which spherically mounted fiducials are observable by the camera system [ FIG. 3 shows three embodiments of emitter 200: spherically mounted emitter 210, probe mounted emitter 220, and fiducial emitter 230. Spherically mounted emitter 210 comprises partial sphere 212, light source 214, and wire 216. Partial sphere 212 is a sphere in which a segment has been removed. It is preferably made of steel so that it can be held in place by a magnetic nest. Light source 214 is positioned in the center of partial sphere 212…¶0028].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Kwiatkowski when modified by ZHANG and Li such that the method wherein the reference targets are nests, in which spherically mounted fiducials are observable by the camera system, or physical spheres of the same size are measurable by the laser radar; as taught by Raab, for the advantages such as: computing the position in three dimensional coordinates of the object with higher accuracy.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 10 and 12 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 10, the prior arts alone or in combination fails to disclose the claimed limitations such as “the laser radar in the storage is generated by determining the spatial relationship between the camera system and the laser radar for one or more intended measurement positions of the robot before the actual measurement of the object such that the spatial relationship for the intended measurement positions can be used for subsequent object measurements from said intended measurement positions” along with all other limitations of the claim.
As to claim 12, the prior arts alone or in combination fails to disclose the claimed limitations such as a sphere with a fiducial placed at the sphere's center, enabling the camera system to observe said reference target and the laser radar to measure said reference target by scanning the spheres' surface, wherein preferably noting that the position of said reference target is must be known relative to at least two other reference targets observable with the camera system and not on a line with said reference target” along with all other limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD M RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9175. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur.
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, TARIFUR CHOWDHURY can be reached at 571-272-2287. 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.
MD M. RAHMAN
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2886
/MD M RAHMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877