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 .
Response to Amendment
The Office Action is in response to the application filed 02/06/2026. Claims 1, 3-10, 12, and 16-17 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 7-10, filed 02/06/2026, regarding the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103, particularly in view of the disclosure of Yamashita et al. US 20210178589 A1 (“Yamashita”), have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Yamashita does not teach the elements of the amended claim language, particularly regarding “reaching the reference point is an intermediate state in completing the given task,” and “both sequences of operations together constitute a single task-oriented sequence of operations” generated to complete the given task. Applicant argues that unlike claim 1, in Yamashita, robot actions are executed based on redefined conditions and rules that are set in advance,” and are carried out in response to those conditions, rather than being “planned as a task-oriented sequence of operations generated to complete a given task.” However. Yamashita teaches that “the instruction device 20 is a computer for instructing a specific job based on a schedule managed by the scheduling device 10. For example, the instruction device 20 generates a program necessary for each job based on a rough schedule received from the scheduling device 10 [paragraph 25]”. This indicates that a sequence is made for each robot performing each task, as discussed in further detail below. For this reason, the rejection of the claims is maintained. The amendments to claim 10 have overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102, but for the same reasons as claim 1, claim 10 is now rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
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, 3-5, 9-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita et al. US 20210178589 A1 (“Yamashita”) in combination with Suzumura et al. US 20210213606 A1 (“Suzumura”).
Regarding Claim 1. Yamashita teaches an operation planning device comprising:
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions (A scheduling device may include a server computer or personal computer. The scheduling device 10 includes a CPU 11, a storage unit 12, and a communication unit 13. The CPU 11 is an example of a configuration called a circuitry, and includes at least one processor, for example. The storage unit 12 includes a RAM, an EEPROM, and a hard disk. The storage unit 12 stores programs and data [paragraph 24]) to:
set a state in a workspace where a mobile robot equipped with a manipulator handling a target object works (The instruction unit 201 transmits an instruction to each industrial device. For example, the instruction unit 201 transmits a movement instruction including a position of a destination to the self-movable robot 80. Further, for example, the instruction unit 201 transmits a job program and setting data stored in the data storage unit 200 as a job instruction to the cell controller 50 and the self-movable robot 80. In this embodiment, when receiving a job completion notification, the instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location. The instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location on condition that the job completion notification is received [paragraph 74]);
determine, for completing a given task assigned to the robot, a first sequence of operations for causing the robot to reach a reference point in a designated area, based on the state (The scheduling device 10 is a computer that manages a schedule of the entire production system S. A schedule is a plan that indicates when and what a job to do, and may also be referred to as a production plan or a job plan. In the present embodiment, the production system S includes a plurality of cells, and the scheduling device 10 manages schedules of the cells [paragraph 20]. FIG. 3 shows an example of a self-movable robot at 80, with an articulated arm. Paragraph 35 describes how a camera captures the state of the cell, and transmits this image or video to other devices such as the robot controller at 60, which is part of the scheduling setup in FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 3, the robot is shown to be in a state located away from the cells X and Y and does not belong to any cell [paragraph 56]. FIG. 9 shows how the scheduling plan can include the self-movable robot, wherein data regarding the robot’s current location in S2 is used to determine whether to include the self-moving robot [paragraphs 121-122], The examiner is unsure what the applicant meant by “dynamics” and how this term differs from the details such as the robot’s location or movement, but in light of the specification, the “dynamics” of the robot can include the disclosure of paragraph 131 of Yamashita, which states “[i]n S17, the self-movable robot 80 analyzes the surrounding state based on the detection signal of the sensor 94 and the image or video captured by the camera 95. Additionally, the self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. The movement instruction, which is part of the scheduling plan, can include a specific position of the self-movable robot in the cell [paragraph 57]. The job that the robot is intended to perform is then performed after the robot arrives at the cell [paragraph 44]. This means that there is a plan to move to the reference point within a designated area, and another plan to work on the target object after reaching the reference point, which reads on a first and second operation plan. The instruction device 20 is a computer for instructing a specific job based on a schedule managed by the scheduling device 10. For example, the instruction device 20 generates a program necessary for each job based on a rough schedule received from the scheduling device 10 [paragraph 25]); and
determine, once the robot has reached the reference point, a second sequence of operations for completing the given task by causing the robot to move to the target object and operate the target object by the manipulator (The instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location on condition that the job completion notification is received [paragraph 77]), based on:
the state after the robot has reached the reference point (the data storage unit 300 stores a state of the industrial device and a state of a job object that are obtained by analyzing the image or the video [paragraph 77]. When image analysis is performed by the cell controller 50, the information collecting unit 301 collects an analysis result of the image analysis (a state of the industrial device or a state of the job object) from the cell controller 50. For example, the information collecting unit 301 collects information transmitted from the self-movable robot 80 when the self-movable robot 80 arrives at each cell [paragraph 78]), and
an evaluation function based on dynamics of the robot (The scheduling device 10 is a computer that manages a schedule of the entire production system S. A schedule is a plan that indicates when and what a job to do, and may also be referred to as a production plan or a job plan. In the present embodiment, the production system S includes a plurality of cells, and the scheduling device 10 manages schedules of the cells [paragraph 20]. FIG. 3 shows an example of a self-movable robot at 80, with an articulated arm. Paragraph 35 describes how a camera captures the state of the cell, and transmits this image or video to other devices such as the robot controller at 60, which is part of the scheduling setup in FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 3, the robot is shown to be in a state located away from the cells X and Y and does not belong to any cell [paragraph 56]. FIG. 9 shows how the scheduling plan can include the self-movable robot, wherein data regarding the robot’s current location in S2 is used to determine whether to include the self-moving robot [paragraphs 121-122], The examiner is unsure what the applicant meant by “dynamics” and how this term differs from the details such as the robot’s location or movement, but in light of the specification, the “dynamics” of the robot can include the disclosure of paragraph 131 of Yamashita, which states “[i]n S17, the self-movable robot 80 analyzes the surrounding state based on the detection signal of the sensor 94 and the image or video captured by the camera 95. The self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. Additionally, the self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. The movement instruction, which is part of the scheduling plan, can include a specific position of the self-movable robot in the cell [paragraph 57]. The job that the robot is intended to perform is then performed after the robot arrives at the cell [paragraph 44]. This means that there is a plan to move to the reference point within a designated area, and another plan to work on the target object after reaching the reference point, which reads on a first and second operation plan).
Yamashita does not teach:
The operation plan is also based on:
a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator.
However, Suzumura teaches:
The operation plan is also based on:
a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator (Motion planning typically generates trajectory data representing trajectories that can avoid obstacles around the robot. Thus, motion planning allows faster identification of the parameter in an environment with obstacles. To generate trajectory data that avoids obstacles using non-linear optimization, the surrounding environment is identified in the 3D space of the robot. Then, the area of obstacles or the area that avoids obstacles is projected in a configuration space including robot postures. The data is mathematically expressed with the area of obstacles as a constraint. These processes typically involve an enormous calculation cost, possibly disabling fast planning of the identification operation in an environment with obstacles [paragraph 60]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with the operation plan is also based on: a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator as taught by Suzumura so as to allow the robot to avoid dangerous hazards or obstacles on its way to the work location.
Regarding Claim 3. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura teaches the operation planning device according to claim 1.
Yamashita also teaches:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to set the reference point based on the position of the target object (FIG. 6, paragraphs 63-64).
Regarding Claim 4. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura teaches the operation planning device according to claim 3.
Yamashita also teaches:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine the reference point based on a position of the target object and a reach range of the manipulator (The synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 in response to the operation of the fixed robot 70. For example, the synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 so as to be a predetermined distance from the fixed robot 70 (so as not to contact the robot 70). For example, the synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 such that, when the fixed robot 70 holds a job object, the robot hand of the self-movable robot 80 approaches the job object. For example, the synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 such that, when the self-movable robot 80 holds a job object, the job object approaches the fixed robot 70 [paragraph 151]. This inherently means that the robot must move near the position of the target object, wherein the object is within a reach range of the self-movable robot).
Yamashita does not explicitly teach:
The reference point is also determined based on a movement error of the robot (There is an error detection in paragraph 141, FIG. 11, but it is not explicit).
However, Suzumura teaches:
The reference point is also determined based on a movement error of the robot (the control unit 6 may obtain a position error (positional deviation) of the carriage reference point with respect to the reference work position P1 based on the positional relationship between the detected marker 51 and the carriage 7, and control the operation shafts of the carriage 7 to cancel this position error [paragraph 48]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with the reference point is also determined based on a movement error of the robot as taught by Suzumura so as to allow the system to adjust for errors in the robot’s movement towards its destination.
Regarding Claim 5. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura teaches the operation planning device according to claim 1.
Yamashita also teaches:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to, if the robot reaches the reference point based on the first operation plan, execute the instructions to determine a state setting space in which at least the robot and the target object are present and set the state within the state setting space (Due to how loosely the specification describes a “state setting space”, the examiner is interpreting this language to mean “any space in which the state can be set”. Since the camera at 72 of FIG. 1 can capture a state of the cell, a robot, or the current state of the job object [paragraph 35], the location within the field of view of the camera at 72 can read on a state setting space).
Regarding Claim 9. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura teaches the operation planning device according to claim 1.
Yamashita also teaches:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to further execute the instructions to:
convert a task to be executed by the robot into a logical formula in a form of a temporal logic, based on the state;
generate a time step logical formula that is a formula representing the state for each time step to execute the task; and
generate, as the operation plan, a subtask sequence to be executed by the robot, based on the time step logical formula (This is the logical process shown in FIGS. 9-11. FIG. 10 in particular shows steps that have to be done in a particular time-step sequence, with details about state/condition of the robot to execute each task, such as “has arrived at next cell?” at S19, which is checked before making wired connection at S20).
Regarding Claim 10. Yamashita teaches an operation planning device comprising:
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions (A scheduling device may include a server computer or personal computer. The scheduling device 10 includes a CPU 11, a storage unit 12, and a communication unit 13. The CPU 11 is an example of a configuration called a circuitry, and includes at least one processor, for example. The storage unit 12 includes a RAM, an EEPROM, and a hard disk. The storage unit 12 stores programs and data [paragraph 24]) to:
receive designation of an area where a mobile robot equipped with a manipulator handling a target object works (The instruction unit 201 transmits an instruction to each industrial device. For example, the instruction unit 201 transmits a movement instruction including a position of a destination to the self-movable robot 80. Further, for example, the instruction unit 201 transmits a job program and setting data stored in the data storage unit 200 as a job instruction to the cell controller 50 and the self-movable robot 80. In this embodiment, when receiving a job completion notification, the instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location. The instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location on condition that the job completion notification is received [paragraph 74]);
receive designation relating to the target object in the area;
determine, for completing a given task assigned to the robot, a first sequence of operations for causing the robot to reach a reference point in a designated area, based on the state (The scheduling device 10 is a computer that manages a schedule of the entire production system S. A schedule is a plan that indicates when and what a job to do, and may also be referred to as a production plan or a job plan. In the present embodiment, the production system S includes a plurality of cells, and the scheduling device 10 manages schedules of the cells [paragraph 20]. FIG. 3 shows an example of a self-movable robot at 80, with an articulated arm. Paragraph 35 describes how a camera captures the state of the cell, and transmits this image or video to other devices such as the robot controller at 60, which is part of the scheduling setup in FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 3, the robot is shown to be in a state located away from the cells X and Y and does not belong to any cell [paragraph 56]. FIG. 9 shows how the scheduling plan can include the self-movable robot, wherein data regarding the robot’s current location in S2 is used to determine whether to include the self-moving robot [paragraphs 121-122], The examiner is unsure what the applicant meant by “dynamics” and how this term differs from the details such as the robot’s location or movement, but in light of the specification, the “dynamics” of the robot can include the disclosure of paragraph 131 of Yamashita, which states “[i]n S17, the self-movable robot 80 analyzes the surrounding state based on the detection signal of the sensor 94 and the image or video captured by the camera 95. Additionally, the self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. The movement instruction, which is part of the scheduling plan, can include a specific position of the self-movable robot in the cell [paragraph 57]. The job that the robot is intended to perform is then performed after the robot arrives at the cell [paragraph 44]. This means that there is a plan to move to the reference point within a designated area, and another plan to work on the target object after reaching the reference point, which reads on a first and second operation plan. The instruction device 20 is a computer for instructing a specific job based on a schedule managed by the scheduling device 10. For example, the instruction device 20 generates a program necessary for each job based on a rough schedule received from the scheduling device 10 [paragraph 25]); and
determine, once the robot has reached the reference point, a second sequence of operations for completing the given task by causing the robot to move to the target object and operate the target object by the manipulator (The instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location on condition that the job completion notification is received [paragraph 77]), based on:
the state after the robot has reached the reference point (the data storage unit 300 stores a state of the industrial device and a state of a job object that are obtained by analyzing the image or the video [paragraph 77]. When image analysis is performed by the cell controller 50, the information collecting unit 301 collects an analysis result of the image analysis (a state of the industrial device or a state of the job object) from the cell controller 50. For example, the information collecting unit 301 collects information transmitted from the self-movable robot 80 when the self-movable robot 80 arrives at each cell [paragraph 78]),
an evaluation function based on dynamics of the robot (The scheduling device 10 is a computer that manages a schedule of the entire production system S. A schedule is a plan that indicates when and what a job to do, and may also be referred to as a production plan or a job plan. In the present embodiment, the production system S includes a plurality of cells, and the scheduling device 10 manages schedules of the cells [paragraph 20]. FIG. 3 shows an example of a self-movable robot at 80, with an articulated arm. Paragraph 35 describes how a camera captures the state of the cell, and transmits this image or video to other devices such as the robot controller at 60, which is part of the scheduling setup in FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 3, the robot is shown to be in a state located away from the cells X and Y and does not belong to any cell [paragraph 56]. FIG. 9 shows how the scheduling plan can include the self-movable robot, wherein data regarding the robot’s current location in S2 is used to determine whether to include the self-moving robot [paragraphs 121-122], The examiner is unsure what the applicant meant by “dynamics” and how this term differs from the details such as the robot’s location or movement, but in light of the specification, the “dynamics” of the robot can include the disclosure of paragraph 131 of Yamashita, which states “[i]n S17, the self-movable robot 80 analyzes the surrounding state based on the detection signal of the sensor 94 and the image or video captured by the camera 95. The self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. Additionally, the self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. The movement instruction, which is part of the scheduling plan, can include a specific position of the self-movable robot in the cell [paragraph 57]. The job that the robot is intended to perform is then performed after the robot arrives at the cell [paragraph 44]. This means that there is a plan to move to the reference point within a designated area, and another plan to work on the target object after reaching the reference point, which reads on a first and second operation plan).
Yamashita does not teach:
The operation plan is also based on:
a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator.
However, Suzumura teaches:
The operation plan is also based on:
a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator (Motion planning typically generates trajectory data representing trajectories that can avoid obstacles around the robot. Thus, motion planning allows faster identification of the parameter in an environment with obstacles. To generate trajectory data that avoids obstacles using non-linear optimization, the surrounding environment is identified in the 3D space of the robot. Then, the area of obstacles or the area that avoids obstacles is projected in a configuration space including robot postures. The data is mathematically expressed with the area of obstacles as a constraint. These processes typically involve an enormous calculation cost, possibly disabling fast planning of the identification operation in an environment with obstacles [paragraph 60]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with the operation plan is also based on: a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator as taught by Suzumura so as to allow the robot to avoid dangerous hazards or obstacles on its way to the work location.
Regarding Claim 12. Yamashita teaches an operation planning method executed by a computer (paragraph 24), the operation planning method comprising:
setting a state in a workspace where a mobile robot equipped with a manipulator handling a target object works (The instruction unit 201 transmits an instruction to each industrial device. For example, the instruction unit 201 transmits a movement instruction including a position of a destination to the self-movable robot 80. Further, for example, the instruction unit 201 transmits a job program and setting data stored in the data storage unit 200 as a job instruction to the cell controller 50 and the self-movable robot 80. In this embodiment, when receiving a job completion notification, the instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location. The instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location on condition that the job completion notification is received [paragraph 74]);
determining, for completing a given task assigned to the robot, a first sequence of operations for causing the robot to reach a reference point in a designated area, based on the state (The scheduling device 10 is a computer that manages a schedule of the entire production system S. A schedule is a plan that indicates when and what a job to do, and may also be referred to as a production plan or a job plan. In the present embodiment, the production system S includes a plurality of cells, and the scheduling device 10 manages schedules of the cells [paragraph 20]. FIG. 3 shows an example of a self-movable robot at 80, with an articulated arm. Paragraph 35 describes how a camera captures the state of the cell, and transmits this image or video to other devices such as the robot controller at 60, which is part of the scheduling setup in FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 3, the robot is shown to be in a state located away from the cells X and Y and does not belong to any cell [paragraph 56]. FIG. 9 shows how the scheduling plan can include the self-movable robot, wherein data regarding the robot’s current location in S2 is used to determine whether to include the self-moving robot [paragraphs 121-122], The examiner is unsure what the applicant meant by “dynamics” and how this term differs from the details such as the robot’s location or movement, but in light of the specification, the “dynamics” of the robot can include the disclosure of paragraph 131 of Yamashita, which states “[i]n S17, the self-movable robot 80 analyzes the surrounding state based on the detection signal of the sensor 94 and the image or video captured by the camera 95. Additionally, the self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. The movement instruction, which is part of the scheduling plan, can include a specific position of the self-movable robot in the cell [paragraph 57]. The job that the robot is intended to perform is then performed after the robot arrives at the cell [paragraph 44]. This means that there is a plan to move to the reference point within a designated area, and another plan to work on the target object after reaching the reference point, which reads on a first and second operation plan. The instruction device 20 is a computer for instructing a specific job based on a schedule managed by the scheduling device 10. For example, the instruction device 20 generates a program necessary for each job based on a rough schedule received from the scheduling device 10 [paragraph 25]); and
determine, once the robot has reached the reference point, a second sequence of operations for completing the given task by causing the robot to move to the target object and operate the target object by the manipulator (The instruction unit 201 instructs the self-movable robot 80 to move to the next location on condition that the job completion notification is received [paragraph 77]), based on:
the state after the robot has reached the reference point (the data storage unit 300 stores a state of the industrial device and a state of a job object that are obtained by analyzing the image or the video [paragraph 77]. When image analysis is performed by the cell controller 50, the information collecting unit 301 collects an analysis result of the image analysis (a state of the industrial device or a state of the job object) from the cell controller 50. For example, the information collecting unit 301 collects information transmitted from the self-movable robot 80 when the self-movable robot 80 arrives at each cell [paragraph 78]), and
an evaluation function based on dynamics of the robot (The scheduling device 10 is a computer that manages a schedule of the entire production system S. A schedule is a plan that indicates when and what a job to do, and may also be referred to as a production plan or a job plan. In the present embodiment, the production system S includes a plurality of cells, and the scheduling device 10 manages schedules of the cells [paragraph 20]. FIG. 3 shows an example of a self-movable robot at 80, with an articulated arm. Paragraph 35 describes how a camera captures the state of the cell, and transmits this image or video to other devices such as the robot controller at 60, which is part of the scheduling setup in FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 3, the robot is shown to be in a state located away from the cells X and Y and does not belong to any cell [paragraph 56]. FIG. 9 shows how the scheduling plan can include the self-movable robot, wherein data regarding the robot’s current location in S2 is used to determine whether to include the self-moving robot [paragraphs 121-122], The examiner is unsure what the applicant meant by “dynamics” and how this term differs from the details such as the robot’s location or movement, but in light of the specification, the “dynamics” of the robot can include the disclosure of paragraph 131 of Yamashita, which states “[i]n S17, the self-movable robot 80 analyzes the surrounding state based on the detection signal of the sensor 94 and the image or video captured by the camera 95. The self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. Additionally, the self-movable robot 80 moves on the movement path by rotating the motor 96 based on the analysis result”. The movement instruction, which is part of the scheduling plan, can include a specific position of the self-movable robot in the cell [paragraph 57]. The job that the robot is intended to perform is then performed after the robot arrives at the cell [paragraph 44]. This means that there is a plan to move to the reference point within a designated area, and another plan to work on the target object after reaching the reference point, which reads on a first and second operation plan).
Yamashita does not teach:
The operation plan is also based on:
a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator.
However, Suzumura teaches:
The operation plan is also based on:
a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator (Motion planning typically generates trajectory data representing trajectories that can avoid obstacles around the robot. Thus, motion planning allows faster identification of the parameter in an environment with obstacles. To generate trajectory data that avoids obstacles using non-linear optimization, the surrounding environment is identified in the 3D space of the robot. Then, the area of obstacles or the area that avoids obstacles is projected in a configuration space including robot postures. The data is mathematically expressed with the area of obstacles as a constraint. These processes typically involve an enormous calculation cost, possibly disabling fast planning of the identification operation in an environment with obstacles [paragraph 60]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with the operation plan is also based on: a constraint condition relating to the movement of the robot and the operation of the manipulator as taught by Suzumura so as to allow the robot to avoid dangerous hazards or obstacles on its way to the work location.
Regarding Claim 16. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura teaches the operation planning device according to claim 1.
Yamashita also teaches:
wherein the robot is equipped with a self-propelled main body and the manipulator (FIG. 3 shows a mobile robot with a manipulator arm at 80).
Regarding Claim 17. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura teaches the operation planning device according to claim 1.
Yamashita also teaches:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine the reference point based on a reach range of the robot and a position of the target object (The synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 in response to the operation of the fixed robot 70. For example, the synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 so as to be a predetermined distance from the fixed robot 70 (so as not to contact the robot 70). For example, the synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 such that, when the fixed robot 70 holds a job object, the robot hand of the self-movable robot 80 approaches the job object. For example, the synchronization control unit 805 operates the self-movable robot 80 such that, when the self-movable robot 80 holds a job object, the job object approaches the fixed robot 70 [paragraph 151]. This inherently means that the robot must move near the position of the target object, wherein the object is within a reach range of the self-movable robot).
Yamashita does not explicitly teach:
The reference point is also determined based on a movement error of the robot (There is an error detection in paragraph 141, FIG. 11, but it is not explicit).
However, Suzumura teaches:
The reference point is also determined based on a movement error of the robot (the control unit 6 may obtain a position error (positional deviation) of the carriage reference point with respect to the reference work position P1 based on the positional relationship between the detected marker 51 and the carriage 7, and control the operation shafts of the carriage 7 to cancel this position error [paragraph 48]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with the reference point is also determined based on a movement error of the robot as taught by Suzumura so as to allow the system to adjust for errors in the robot’s movement towards its destination.
Claim(s) 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita et al. US 20210178589 A1 (“Yamashita”) in combination with Suzumura et al. US 20210213606 A1 (“Suzumura”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of High et al. US 20190389074 A1 (“High”).
Regarding Claim 6. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura teaches the operation planning device according to claim 1.
Yamashita does not teach:
wherein, if a priority to be prioritized in determining the operation plan is specified, the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine at least one of the constraint condition and/or the evaluation function, based on the priority.
However, High teaches:
wherein, if a priority to be prioritized in determining the operation plan is specified, the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine at least one of the constraint condition and/or the evaluation function, based on the priority (Generating, by the processor, a queue of tasks to complete the mission based on priorities and dependencies of the tasks, wherein each task is prioritized based on a safety level and a timeliness for the associate to perform the task [paragraph 5]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with wherein, if a priority to be prioritized in determining the operation plan is specified, the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine at least one of the constraint condition and/or the evaluation function, based on the priority as taught by High so as to allow the system to set a priority regarding safety and efficiency for the robot.
Regarding Claim 7. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura and High teaches the operation planning device according to claim 6.
Yamashita does not teach:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to, if a work time length is prioritized as the priority,
execute the instructions to set the evaluation function having a positive or negative correlation with the work time length.
However, High teaches:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to, if a work time length is prioritized as the priority,
execute the instructions to set the evaluation function having a positive or negative correlation with the work time length (FIG. 3, paragraphs 38-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with wherein the at least one processor is configured to, if a work time length is prioritized as the priority, execute the instructions to set the evaluation function having a positive or negative correlation with the work time length as taught by High so as to allow the system to set a priority regarding efficiency for the robot.
Regarding Claim 8. Yamashita in combination with Suzumura and High teaches the operation planning device according to claim 6.
Yamashita does not teach:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to, if a safety is prioritized as the priority,
execute the instructions to set the constraint condition which requires exclusive executions between movement of the robot and operation of the manipulator.
However, High teaches:
wherein the at least one processor is configured to, if a safety is prioritized as the priority,
execute the instructions to set the constraint condition which requires exclusive executions between movement of the robot and operation of the manipulator (FIG. 3, paragraphs 38-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of Yamashita with wherein the at least one processor is configured to, if a safety is prioritized as the priority, execute the instructions to set the constraint condition which requires exclusive executions between movement of the robot and operation of the manipulator as taught by High so as to allow the system to set a priority regarding safety for the robot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON G CAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7009. The examiner can normally be reached Monday: 7:30am - 4:30pm EST to Friday 7:30pm - 4:30am.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/AARON G CAIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights