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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/20/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
Misnumbered claim 6 has been renumbered 5.
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) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakasu et al. (US 20190217472 A1) in view of Watanabe et al. (US 20170357242 A1, hereinafter Watanabe).
Regarding claim 1, Nakasu teaches:
A control apparatus for controlling a robot such that a manipulator of the robot moves from a start position to a goal position (at least as in paragraph 0030, “The robot controlling device 104 is a device that instructs the robot 101 to operate according to an instruction from the robot work instructing device 106”; at least as in paragraph 0030, wherein the robot includes a robot work instructing device that provides instructions such as a moving trajectory and moving timing of a robot with various movement positions), the control apparatus comprising:
a calculation unit that calculates a risk value of interference between the manipulator and an object (at least as in paragraph 0068, “the risk determining unit 115 performs a risk determining process”; at least as in paragraph 0069, wherein the risk determining unit determines a risk of collision between the robot and object; at least as in paragraph 0061, “The collision avoidance unit 109 determines a risk of collision based on sensing data of the robot 101 and the worker 102 obtained by the sensor 103”);
a generation unit that generates a command for causing the manipulator to operate, based on a target operation selected in accordance with the risk value from a group including a plurality of types of operations (at least as in paragraph 0061, wherein the collision avoidance unit “generates the collision avoidance trajectory and outputs the collision avoidance trajectory to the robot control instructing unit 105 when it is determined that there is the risk of collision”); and
the first group includes a first operation as an operation when the risk value is within a first range, the first operation being an operation that changes a trajectory to lower the risk value (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When evacuation is determined, a state of the “evacuation” is provided (S22), the collision avoidance trajectory generating process (S16), the robot data converting process (S17), and the collision avoidance trajectory outputting process (S18) are performed, and collision avoidance trajectory information is output to the robot control instructing unit 105. Thereafter, the determination result “evacuation” is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and a robot operation is switched to the collision avoidance trajectory output in S18”), and
the second group includes:
the first operation as an operation when the risk value is within a first subrange that is a part of the first range (at least as in paragraph 0036, “The collision avoidance trajectory generating unit 116 is a unit that generates a trajectory for evacuating the robot 101 from the worker 102. The collision avoidance determining unit 124 is a unit that determines whether or not avoidance of collision is possible in the generated collision avoidance trajectory used in a collision avoidance trajectory generating process”) and
a second operation as an operation when the risk value is within a second subrange of the first range different from the first subrange, the second operation being an operation that reduces a velocity without changing the trajectory (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When deceleration is determined by the risk determining process, a status of the “deceleration” is provided (S20) and is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and the robot 101 continues to perform an operation after an operation velocity is reduced. At this time, an operation trajectory is a trajectory instructed by the robot work instructing device 106”).
However, Nakasu does not explicitly teach “a setting unit that sets a first group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the start position than a reference position, and sets a second group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the goal position than the reference position.”
Watanabe, in the same field of endeavor of a robot control system with collision avoidance, specifically teaches “a setting unit that sets a first group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the start position than a reference position, and sets a second group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the goal position than the reference position” (at least as in paragraph 0037-0038, wherein the operation region is divided into multiple subregions, the low-speed operation regions being closer to the operator than the highspeed-operation region; at least as in paragraph 0041-0042, wherein each operation region has different a control method or functionality such as a limitation in the maximum speed or collision detection sensitivity).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Nakasu, to include Watanabe's teaching of collision avoidance using operation regions, since Watanabe teaches wherein the operation regions improves workplace safety by reducing the chances of collision as the robot system will operate in a more safe manner in areas closer to people.
Regarding claim 2, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
each of the first group and the second group includes a third operation as an operation when the risk value is within a second range that is below the first range, the third operation being an operation that causes the manipulator to operate at a standard velocity without changing the trajectory of the manipulator (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When non-avoidance is determined by the risk determining process, a status of the “non-avoidance” is provided (S19) and is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and the robot 101 executes an operation instructed by the robot work instructing device 106 without changing the operation”), and
the second operation causes the manipulator to operate at a velocity lower than the standard velocity (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When deceleration is determined by the risk determining process, a status of the “deceleration” is provided (S20) and is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and the robot 101 continues to perform an operation after an operation velocity is reduced”).
Regarding claim 3, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
each of the first group and the second group includes a fourth operation as an operation when the risk value is within a third range that is above the first range, the fourth operation being an operation that returns the manipulator toward the start position (at least as in paragraph 0080, “An algorithm of generating various collision avoidance trajectories such as a trajectory in which movement is performed in parallel to the velocity vector of the worker and a trajectory in which movement is performed in a direction in which an angle with the velocity vector of the worker is an acute angle, with reference to, for example, a trajectory reverse to a path through which movement has been performed until now and the worker velocity vector as a robot evacuating trajectory can be stored in the trajectory generating method information table 500 and can be used for generating the collision avoidance trajectory”; at least as in paragraph 0084, “As illustrated in FIG. 12, in a robot velocity vector Vr (Rx, Ry, Rz) and a worker velocity vector Vw (Wx, Wy, Wz) of the worker 102 when the robot 101 starts a collision avoidance operation, a starting point R0 (Xr0, Yr0, Zr0) of the robot velocity vector Vr is a current position of the robot 101, a starting point W0 (Xw0, Yw0, Zw0) of the worker velocity vector Vw is a current position of the worker, and positions of the robot 101 and the worker 102 when a unit time elapses are R1 and W1, respectively”).
Regarding claim 4, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the calculation unit calculates the risk value such that the risk value becomes larger as an angle formed by a relative movement direction of the object with respect to the manipulator and a line connecting the object and the manipulator becomes closer to 0° (at least as in paragraph 0036, wherein the control system determines the position and velocity vectors of the robot and object or worker; at least as in paragraph 0064, “the position/velocity vector calculating unit 113 performs a position/velocity vector calculating process (S13). In this process, the position vector and the velocity vector of the representative point of the robot 101 are calculated from information on the joint angle of the robot acquired by the robot state acquiring process of S11 and the robot model information stored in the model information table 300, and the position vector and the velocity vector of the representative point of the worker are calculated from information of the joint angle of the worker 102 acquired by the sensing data acquiring process and the worker model information stored in the model information table 300”; at least as in paragraph 0088, “whether or not the robot velocity vector Vr and the worker velocity vector Vw are parallel to each other is determined (S61). When the two straight lines are parallel to each other, a distance between the two straight lines is calculated as the shortest distance D3 (S62). When the two straight lines are not parallel to each other and are located in a skew position, the common perpendicular line Lh of the straight line Lr passing through R0 and parallel to Vr and the straight line Lw passing through W0 and parallel to Vw is obtained (S63). Since the length of the common perpendicular line is the shortest distance between the two straight lines, the length of the common perpendicular line is calculated as the shortest distance D3 (S64)”).
Regarding claim 5, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the calculation unit calculates the risk value such that the risk value becomes larger as a velocity of the object becomes higher, and calculates the risk value such that the risk value becomes larger as a distance between the object and the manipulator becomes shorter (at least as in paragraph 0064, “the position/velocity vector calculating unit 113 performs a position/velocity vector calculating process (S13). In this process, the position vector and the velocity vector of the representative point of the robot 101 are calculated from information on the joint angle of the robot acquired by the robot state acquiring process of S11 and the robot model information stored in the model information table 300, and the position vector and the velocity vector of the representative point of the worker are calculated from information of the joint angle of the worker 102 acquired by the sensing data acquiring process and the worker model information stored in the model information table 300. Here, the representative point is a point at which the risk of collision is high, such as a tip of a hand or a tip of an object that the hand is holding. The point at which the risk of collision is high varies depending on a relative position relationship between the robot 101 and the worker 102 and work contents”; at least as in paragraph 0065, “the risk determination area generating unit 114 performs a risk determination area generating process (S14). In this process, the risk determination area is generated using the position vector and the velocity vector of the representative point of the robot 101 and the worker 102 acquired by the position/velocity vector calculating process of S13 and the robot model information and the worker model information stored in the model information table 300”).
Regarding claim 6, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the calculation unit calculates the risk value such that the risk value becomes larger as a length from the start position to a current position of the manipulator along the trajectory of the manipulator becomes longer (at least as in paragraph 0081, “a direction of the velocity vector of the robot, in which a distance between the robot and the worker after a unit time, which is calculated based on the velocity vector of the robot and the velocity vector of the worker when the avoidance of collision starts, increases, can be used as the collision avoidance trajectory”; at least as in paragraph 0082, “a direction of the velocity vector of the robot, in which a minimum distance between on the velocity vector of the robot and the velocity vector of the worker when the avoidance of collision starts is larger than a predetermined value, can be used as the collision avoidance trajectory”; at least as in paragraph 0085, “In the avoidance determining process, first, a distance D0 between the starting point R0 of the robot velocity vector and the starting point W0 of the worker velocity vector is calculated using Equation (1) (S51)”).
Regarding claim 7, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 2, wherein
the calculation unit calculates the risk value using a risk function including a term and a constant term, the term including a distance between the object and the manipulator and a velocity of the object,
a value of the constant term is negative, and
an upper limit value of the second range is 0 (at least as in paragraph 0081-0085, wherein the avoidance determining process utilizes the distance between the robot and worker and the velocity of both robot and worker to determine whether to conduct collision avoidance procedures; at least as in paragraph 0086, “As illustrated in FIG. 14, when the robot 101 starts an avoidance operation, the position of the robot is R0, the robot velocity vector is Vr, the position of the worker 102 is W0, and the worker velocity vector is Vw. A point Rt on a straight line Lr passing through R0 and parallel to Vr and a point Ws on a straight line Lw passing through W0 and parallel to Vw are represented by Equation (6) and Equation (7). Here, s and t are predetermined real numbers”).
Regarding claim 8, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the calculation unit calculates the risk value using a risk function,
the risk function includes a term given by H(x)x(vobs2/D)xf(Scur),
where x denotes a cosine of an angle formed by a relative movement direction of the object with respect to the manipulator and a line connecting the object and the manipulator, vobs denotes a velocity of the object, D denotes a distance between the manipulator and the object, and Scur denotes a length from the start position to a current position of the manipulator along the trajectory of the manipulator,
H(x) becomes larger as x becomes closer to 1, and
f(Scur) becomes larger as L becomes longer (at least as in paragraph 0087, “As illustrated in FIG. 14, when the robot 101 starts an avoidance operation, the position of the robot is R0, the robot velocity vector is Vr, the position of the worker 102 is W0, and the worker velocity vector is Vw. A point Rt on a straight line Lr passing through R0 and parallel to Vr and a point Ws on a straight line Lw passing through W0 and parallel to Vw are represented by Equation (6) and Equation (7). Here, s and t are predetermined real numbers”; at least as in paragraph 0088, “First, whether or not the robot velocity vector Vr and the worker velocity vector Vw are parallel to each other is determined (S61). When the two straight lines are parallel to each other, a distance between the two straight lines is calculated as the shortest distance D3 (S62). When the two straight lines are not parallel to each other and are located in a skew position, the common perpendicular line Lh of the straight line Lr passing through R0 and parallel to Vr and the straight line Lw passing through W0 and parallel to Vw is obtained (S63). Since the length of the common perpendicular line is the shortest distance between the two straight lines, the length of the common perpendicular line is calculated as the shortest distance D3 (S64)”; at least as in paragraph 0089, “Next, a minimum approach distance C stored in the approach distance information of the collision avoidance information table 400 is referenced, and the shortest distance D3 and the minimum approach distance C are compared with each other (S65). When the shortest distance D3 is larger than the minimum approach distance C, since the robot and the worker do not collide with each other at any point of the straight lines Lr and Lw, “avoidable” is stored in trajectory generating method information 133 (S68). When the shortest distance D3 is equal to or less than the minimum approach distance C, t2 indicating an intersection point R2 between the straight line Lr and the common perpendicular line Lh is obtained from Equation (6), and s2 indicating an intersection point W2 between the straight line Lw and the common perpendicular line Lh is obtained from Equation (7) (S66)”).
Regarding claim 9, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 8, wherein
H(x) includes a hyperbolic tangent function (at least as in paragraph 0085-0088, wherein the avoidance determining process determines the risk of collision or whether the avoidance is possible and the calculation to make such determinations uses equations 1-7 which have an upper and lower limit).
Regarding claim 10, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 8, wherein
f(Scur) includes a sigmoid function (at least as in paragraph 0085-0088, wherein the avoidance determining process determines the risk of collision or whether the avoidance is possible and the calculation to make such determinations uses equations 1-7 which have an upper and lower limit).
Regarding claim 11, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 2, wherein
a ratio of a movement velocity of the manipulator in the second operation to the standard velocity becomes smaller as a length from the start position to a current position of the manipulator along the trajectory of the manipulator becomes longer (at least as in paragraph 0053, “The deceleration operating velocity upper limit 402a is information on an upper limit value of a velocity when the robot 101 decelerates. The worker velocity ratio 402b is a deceleration ratio with respect to the velocity of the worker. The robot instructing value velocity ratio 402c is a deceleration ratio with respect to a robot instructing value”).
Regarding claim 12, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the calculation unit calculates the risk value such that the risk value becomes larger as an amount of loading of the manipulator becomes larger (at least as in paragraph 0044, “The model information table 300 is a table storing basic data (model information) for providing a work instruction to the robot, and includes storage fields of robot model information 301, worker model information 302, and work environment model information 303, as illustrated in FIG. 3. The robot model information 301 is a field storing information on a robot structure and an accessory, and has information including middle items such as the number 301a of links, a link dimension 301b, link connection information 301c, robot representative point coordinates 301d, a gripped object size 301e, and gripping coordinates 301f”; at least as in paragraph 0077, “in one of various trajectory avoidance generating methods stored in the trajectory generating method information table 500, the collision avoidance trajectory is generated, and point sequence data of the trajectory is stored in the trajectory generating method information table 500 (S40). Next, it is determined whether or not avoidance is possible, and a result of the determination is stored in the trajectory generating method information table 500 (S41)”).
Regarding claim 13, in view of the above combination of Nakasu and Watanabe, Nakasu further teaches:
The control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the calculation unit calculates the risk value using a risk function including a term and a constant term, the term including a distance between the object and the manipulator and a velocity of the object (at least as in paragraph 0081-0085, wherein the avoidance determining process utilizes the distance between the robot and worker and the velocity of both robot and worker to determine whether to conduct collision avoidance procedures; at least as in paragraph 0086, “As illustrated in FIG. 14, when the robot 101 starts an avoidance operation, the position of the robot is R0, the robot velocity vector is Vr, the position of the worker 102 is W0, and the worker velocity vector is Vw. A point Rt on a straight line Lr passing through R0 and parallel to Vr and a point Ws on a straight line Lw passing through W0 and parallel to Vw are represented by Equation (6) and Equation (7). Here, s and t are predetermined real numbers”), and
the constant term is set in accordance with a human that works cooperatively with the robot (at least as in paragraph 0035, “The robot control instructing unit 105 is a unit that provides an operation instruction to the robot 101. The collision avoidance unit 109 is a unit that generates a collision avoidance trajectory for avoiding a collision between the worker 102 and the robot 101, and outputs the collision avoidance trajectory to the robot control instructing unit 105”).
Regarding claim 14, Nakasu teaches:
A control method for controlling a robot such that a manipulator of the robot moves from a start position to a goal position (at least as in paragraph 0030, “The robot controlling device 104 is a device that instructs the robot 101 to operate according to an instruction from the robot work instructing device 106”; at least as in paragraph 0030, wherein the robot includes a robot work instructing device that provides instructions such as a moving trajectory and moving timing of a robot with various movement positions), the control method comprising:
calculating a risk value of interference between the manipulator and an object (at least as in paragraph 0068, “the risk determining unit 115 performs a risk determining process”; at least as in paragraph 0069, wherein the risk determining unit determines a risk of collision between the robot and object; at least as in paragraph 0061, “The collision avoidance unit 109 determines a risk of collision based on sensing data of the robot 101 and the worker 102 obtained by the sensor 103”);
generating a command for causing the manipulator to operate, based on a target operation selected in accordance with the risk value from a group including a plurality of types of operations (at least as in paragraph 0061, wherein the collision avoidance unit “generates the collision avoidance trajectory and outputs the collision avoidance trajectory to the robot control instructing unit 105 when it is determined that there is the risk of collision”); and
the first group includes a first operation as an operation when the risk value is within a first range, the first operation being an operation that changes a trajectory to lower the risk value (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When evacuation is determined, a state of the “evacuation” is provided (S22), the collision avoidance trajectory generating process (S16), the robot data converting process (S17), and the collision avoidance trajectory outputting process (S18) are performed, and collision avoidance trajectory information is output to the robot control instructing unit 105. Thereafter, the determination result “evacuation” is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and a robot operation is switched to the collision avoidance trajectory output in S18”), and
the second group includes:
the first operation as an operation when the risk value is within a first subrange that is a part of the first range (at least as in paragraph 0036, “The collision avoidance trajectory generating unit 116 is a unit that generates a trajectory for evacuating the robot 101 from the worker 102. The collision avoidance determining unit 124 is a unit that determines whether or not avoidance of collision is possible in the generated collision avoidance trajectory used in a collision avoidance trajectory generating process”); and
a second operation as an operation when the risk value is within a second subrange of the first range different from the first subrange, the second operation being an operation that reduces a velocity without changing the trajectory (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When deceleration is determined by the risk determining process, a status of the “deceleration” is provided (S20) and is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and the robot 101 continues to perform an operation after an operation velocity is reduced. At this time, an operation trajectory is a trajectory instructed by the robot work instructing device 106”).
However, Nakasu does not explicitly teach “setting a first group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the start position than a reference position, and setting a second group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the goal position than the reference position.”
Watanabe, in the same field of endeavor of a robot control system with collision avoidance, specifically teaches “setting a first group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the start position than a reference position, and setting a second group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the goal position than the reference position” (at least as in paragraph 0037-0038, wherein the operation region is divided into multiple subregions, the low-speed operation regions being closer to the operator than the highspeed-operation region; at least as in paragraph 0041-0042, wherein each operation region has different a control method or functionality such as a limitation in the maximum speed or collision detection sensitivity).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Nakasu, to include Watanabe's teaching of collision avoidance using operation regions, since Watanabe teaches wherein the operation regions improves workplace safety by reducing the chances of collision as the robot system will operate in a more safe manner in areas closer to people.
Regarding claim 15, Nakasu teaches:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program that when accessed by a computer (at least as in paragraph 0038, “A general information processing apparatus such as a personal computer may be realized by executing a program realizing each function. In this case, a central processing unit (CPU) loads a program and a table installed in an auxiliary storage device including a hard disk drive (HDD) and a solid state drive (SSD) in a main storage device including a random access memory (RAM), and references and executes the program and the table”), causes the computer to perform a control method comprising:
calculating a risk value of interference between the manipulator and an object (at least as in paragraph 0068, “the risk determining unit 115 performs a risk determining process”; at least as in paragraph 0069, wherein the risk determining unit determines a risk of collision between the robot and object; at least as in paragraph 0061, “The collision avoidance unit 109 determines a risk of collision based on sensing data of the robot 101 and the worker 102 obtained by the sensor 103”);
generating a command for causing the manipulator to operate, based on a target operation selected in accordance with the risk value from a group including a plurality of types of operations (at least as in paragraph 0061, wherein the collision avoidance unit “generates the collision avoidance trajectory and outputs the collision avoidance trajectory to the robot control instructing unit 105 when it is determined that there is the risk of collision”); and
the first group includes a first operation as an operation when the risk value is within a first range, the first operation being an operation that changes a trajectory to lower the risk value (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When evacuation is determined, a state of the “evacuation” is provided (S22), the collision avoidance trajectory generating process (S16), the robot data converting process (S17), and the collision avoidance trajectory outputting process (S18) are performed, and collision avoidance trajectory information is output to the robot control instructing unit 105. Thereafter, the determination result “evacuation” is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and a robot operation is switched to the collision avoidance trajectory output in S18”), and
the second group includes:
the first operation as an operation when the risk value is within a first subrange that is a part of the first range (at least as in paragraph 0036, “The collision avoidance trajectory generating unit 116 is a unit that generates a trajectory for evacuating the robot 101 from the worker 102. The collision avoidance determining unit 124 is a unit that determines whether or not avoidance of collision is possible in the generated collision avoidance trajectory used in a collision avoidance trajectory generating process”); and
a second operation as an operation when the risk value is within a second subrange of the first range different from the first subrange, the second operation being an operation that reduces a velocity without changing the trajectory (at least as in paragraph 0069, “When deceleration is determined by the risk determining process, a status of the “deceleration” is provided (S20) and is transmitted to the robot control instructing unit 105 (S23), and the robot 101 continues to perform an operation after an operation velocity is reduced. At this time, an operation trajectory is a trajectory instructed by the robot work instructing device 106”).
However, Nakasu does not explicitly teach “setting a first group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the start position than a reference position, and setting a second group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the goal position than the reference position.”
Watanabe, in the same field of endeavor of a robot control system with collision avoidance, specifically teaches “setting a first group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the start position than a reference position, and setting a second group as the group when the manipulator is closer to the goal position than the reference position” (at least as in paragraph 0037-0038, wherein the operation region is divided into multiple subregions, the low-speed operation regions being closer to the operator than the highspeed-operation region; at least as in paragraph 0041-0042, wherein each operation region has different a control method or functionality such as a limitation in the maximum speed or collision detection sensitivity).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Nakasu, to include Watanabe's teaching of collision avoidance using operation regions, since Watanabe teaches wherein the operation regions improves workplace safety by reducing the chances of collision as the robot system will operate in a more safe manner in areas closer to people.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICARDO ICHIKAWA VISCARRA whose telephone number is (571)270-0154. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-12 & 2-4 PST.
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, Adam Mott can be reached on (571) 270-5376. 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.
/RICARDO I VISCARRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657