DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 2/20/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 8 and 9 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Jun et al. (US 2021/0064055).
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informality: the phrase “at last one hardware processor” in lines 2-3 should be corrected to --at least one hardware processor--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 7-9 and 16are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jun et al. (US 2021/0064055).
Regarding claim 1, Jun teaches a method for controlling an automatic cleaning apparatus (see Jun Abstract. See also figs. 4, 6(a) and [0067-0071], [0078]-[0079]), comprising:
scanning a boundary of a second surface medium region when the automatic cleaning apparatus cleans a first surface medium region, and generating a second surface medium region set (see Jun figs. 4, 6(a) and [0068] regarding steps S110 and S112 where the robot, while traveling and cleaning a first region, detects an obstacle present in the cleaning area between the first region and a second region (NOTE: in fig. 6(a) the first region is referred to as “first region 1”, the obstacle is referred to as “second region 2” and the second region is referred to as “third region 3”) . See also [0057] where the obstacle can be a carpet, mat or threshold, i.e. a “second surface medium region”);
serving boundary points in the second surface medium region set as obstacle points, and storing the obstacle points in a path searching map (see Jun figs. 4, 6(a) and [0068] regarding step S200 where the robot, after detection of the obstacle, stores a position of the obstacle boundary);
deleting target obstacle points from a path searching map and determining passage paths to a target point based on the path searching map in response to determining that no obstacle-free path to the target point is searched out based on the obstacle points (see Jun figs. 4, 6(a) and[0068]-[0071] where the robot cleaner, after determining the boundary of the obstacle, completes cleaning of the first region and only then crosses the obstacle to clean the second region (NOTE: this is shown in fig. 6(a) as the robot cleaning first region 1, crossing second region 2 and then cleaning third region 3). As shown in fig. 6(a), upon detection of the obstacle (second region 2), the robot finishes cleaning of first region 1 and only then crosses the obstacle to clean third region 3. Thus, it can be seen that the robot determines to cross the obstacle at only one point, i.e. it makes a determination to delete an obstacle point on the boundary of the obstacle in order to cross to the next cleaning region); and
determining the shortest path from the passage paths, and controlling the automatic cleaning apparatus to escape along the shortest path (see Jun fig. 6(a) where the robot perpendicularly crosses the obstacle 2 only once, i.e. via the shortest path, rather than make multiple crossings of obstacle 2).
Regarding claim 7, Jun teaches where the method is applied to the automatic cleaning apparatus in a mode of cleaning only the first surface medium region (see Jun [0057] where the obstacle, whether it is a threshold, carpet or mat, may be cleaned ONLY AFTER the cleaning the floor face. In addition, as shown above in the rejection of claim 1, the robot does not enter/cross the obstacle until cleaning is finished in the first region).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, the claims are directed toward a device for controlling an automatic cleaning apparatus comprising at least one hardware processor and a memory for storing executable instructions that, when executed, direct the processor to execute the methods of claims 1 and 7. Jun teaches where the method is performed by a robot comprising a processor and memory (see Jun fig. 1 and [0037]) and, therefore, claim 8 is rejected under the same rationale used in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, the claim is directed toward a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing computer programs, wherein the computer programs, when executed by at least one hardware processor, implement the method of claim 1. Jun teaches where the method is performed by a robot comprising a processor and memory (see Jun fig. 1 and [0037]), which would require the claimed computer-readable storage medium. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected under the same rationale used in the rejection of claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 and 11-15 are objected to as being dependent upon respective rejected base claims but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the respective base claims and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this or any earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Peter Nolan, whose telephone number is 571-270-7016. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 7:30 am to 5:00 pm.
The fax number for the organization to which this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Peter D Nolan/
Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights