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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/26/2026 has been entered.
Status of Application
Claims 1, 3-5,8-19, and 21-22 are pending. Claims 1, 13, 15, 17, and 19 are the independent claims. Claims 2, 6-7, 20, and 23-24 have been cancelled. This office action is in response to the Amendments received on 1/26/2026.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 01/26/2026, “Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Applicant's arguments according to the Applicant’s Remarks, with respect to claim 1, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to claim 1, applicant argues that Wei and Maki either alone or in combination fails to disclose or suggest receive a first detection result of a detection object from a first detecting part and calculate a position of the transfer target based on the first detection result, receive a second detection result of the transfer target from a second detecting part, the second detecting part and calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result; and control travel of the mobile body based on the detection result from the first detecting part calculation results of the position and the posture. The argument is respectfully unpersuasive. According to the Final office action filed on 10/24/2025, the combination of Wei and Maki teaches the identification device (reads on first detecting device) to detect the fiducial marker (reads on detection object). Further, the newly amended claim 1, recites calculate a position of the transfer target based on the first detection result. According to at least paragraph [0081] of Wei disclosure, the coordinate of the carried object is acquired according to the information carried by fiducial mark that are detected by the identification device (reads on first detecting part). Accordingly, the position of the carried object (reads on the position of carried object) is obtained based on the detecting part (See mapping of claim 1 in office action below) and the transferring device is traveled based on the instruction according to the position of the carried object which meets the claimed limitation (For more detail, please see the rejection of claim 1 in office action below). Furthermore, as also mentioned in the rejection of claim 6 and 23 on page 17 and 18 of the final office action filed on 10/24/2025, in the event Maki doesn’t explicitly teach calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result, Takao reference, the other art of record relied upon previously as an alternative rejection of claim 6 in Final office action filed on 10/24/2025 is relied upon for the rejection of the limitation of the second detecting part and calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result; and control travel of the mobile body based on the detection result from the first detecting part calculation results of the position and the posture. Please see office action below. Accordingly, it is the office stance that the combination of the prior arts of record arrive at the applicant’s claimed invention.
Applicant’s argument, further, regarding claims 13, 15, 17, and 19 are also unpersuasive for the similar reason. It is the office stance that all the rejections has been properly made.
Office Note: Due to applicant’s amendments, further claim rejections appear on the record as stated in the below Office Action.
It is the Office’ stance that all of applicant arguments have been considered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “first detecting part”, “second detecting part”, “control device” in claims 1, 13, 15, 17. According to the specification of the instant application, Page 4, first paragraph, and also Page 5 last paragraph and Page 6 first paragraph, first detecting part and second detecting part have been interpreted as distance sensor or laser rangefinder. Also, Page 17, Lines 11-36, and Page 18, Lines 1-31 of the instant specification provides information regarding the control device. Accordingly, control device has been interpreted as a computer includes a CPU, ROM, RAM, a memory device, an input interface and a communication interface.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 13, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In regards to claims 13, 17 and 19, Applicant has amended to include the limitation “the first detecting part being mounted to the transfer target”. This limitation is not supported by Applicant’s originally filed disclosure, and is considered new matter. Corrective action is required.
A search of Applicant disclosure yields the following:
For example,
(Note: in order for clarification with paragraph numbering, the applicant’s PG-Pub, US-20230348248, has been used for the following citation)
Paragraph [0034], “As shown in FIG. 3, the transfer system 1 according to the embodiment includes the mobile body 10, a detecting part 31 (a first detecting part), the detecting part 32 (a second detecting part), the detecting part 33, and a marker 35 (a detection object).”. Note: none of the detecting parts as shown in for example Fig. 11, are mounted on the transfer target, __which is interpreted as the cart/object to be transferred__, instead detecting parts 33 and 32 are mounted on the mobile body and detecting part 31 is mounted on the pillar. In fact, detection object (marker) is installed on the recited transfer target, not the detecting part, according to the specification.
Paragraph [0052], “the transfer system 1 according to the embodiment includes the marker 35 mounted to the cart 20, i.e., the transfer object, and the detecting part 31 that detects the marker 35.”.
Paragraph [0084], “According to the second modification, the detecting part 31 at the pillar P shown in FIG. 3 can be omitted because the detecting part 34 also functions as the detecting part 31.”. Note: detecting parts 31 is mounted on the pillar, or fixed object, not the transfer target as recited in the claim. Also detecting part 34 is also installed on the mobile device that can function as detecting part 31 as well (See also Fig. 14), therefore none of the detecting parts are mounted on the transfer target as recited in the claims.
Paragraph [0122], Clause 9, “the first detecting part is mounted to the mobile body.”
Paragraph [0137], Clause 15, “the first detecting part detecting a detection object mounted to the object,”. According to this claim and other paragraphs (at least cited paragraphs above), the detection object is mounted to the object (transfer target as recited in the claim) and the first detecting part (which is mounted on the mobile body) detects the detection object.
Therefore, according to the applicant’s instant specification, the detection object is located on an object to be transfer and the plurality of detecting part are located at a pillar (Paragraph [0036]), or the mobile body (element 34 in Fig. 14). Accordingly, the aforementioned limitation of “the first detecting part being mounted to the transfer target”, is not supported by the applicant’s originally filed disclosure,
In order to overcome the new matter rejections above, the Examiner requires applicant to cancel or remove the cited new matter, or to traverse this rejection with a detailed explanation of their position, including paragraph citations and/or drawing figures of how the cited limitations are fully supported by applicant ‘s original disclosure.
For the sake of compact prosecution, the limitation is interpreted in view of applicant disclosure, for example that provides support for XXX"
Claims 14 and 18 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C § 112(a) as being dependent on the rejected based claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 13, 15, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “[…] located at a higher position than the transfer target”, and “a first detecting part located at a higher position than the transfer target when referenced to the surface” in claims 1, 13, 15, 17, and 19 , is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. Particularly, the term “higher position than” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. In other words, the limitation “higher position than the transfer object” is indefinite given that the transfer target's height/position is variable and not definitely defined in the claims in that this relationship/positioning is in reference to some undefined height/shape of "transfer object". Therefore, the aforementioned claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C § 112(b). (See MPEP 2173.05(b) section II).
For the purpose of compact prosecution, and under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the examiner, the term located at a higher position that the transfer target has been interpreted as any location on top of the transfer target or any other location that is above the transfer target.
Claims 3-5, 8-12, 14, 16, 18, and 21-22 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C § 112(b) as being dependent on the indefinite claims.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, 9, 13, 15, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al., US 20180253678 A1, hereinafter “Wei”, in view of Maki, WO 2021220331 A1, hereinafter “Maki”, further in view of Takao, US 20230348247 A1, hereinafter “Takao”.
Regarding claim 1, Wei discloses a transfer system ([0002], [0008]) comprising: a mobile body configured to travel and to transfer a transfer object ([0008], “transporting device with a carried object”, “mobile robot”); a detection object mounted to the transfer object, the detection object being located at a higher position than the transfer object when referenced to a surface on which the mobile body travels ([0081], “fiducial mark 31”, “fiducial mark 31 is provided on the top of carried object 3.”, __fiducial mark on top of the carried object reads on detection object mounted to the object at a higher position than the object __); a first detecting part located at a higher position than the object when referenced to the surface. ([0081], “Carried object identification device 4 can be a fiducial mark identification device 41, used for identifying fiducial mark 31”, “Fiducial mark identification device 41 is provided on the top of work space 1 […] located above the top of carried object 3”, __identification device reads on first detecting part__), the first detecting part being configured to detect the detection object ([0081], “used for identifying fiducial mark 31, and acquiring the coordinate of at least one carried object 3 according to the information carried by fiducial mark 31.”), a control device configured to control the mobile body ([0020]-[0023]), the control device being configured to receive a first detection result of the detection object from the first detecting part and calculate a position of the transfer target based on the first detection result (__Note: since the calculation of the position of the transfer target is based on the first detecting result, position is interpreted as coordinate/location of the transfer target__, [0081], “acquiring the coordinate of at least one carried object 3 according to the information carried by fiducial mark 31.”, __acquiring the coordinate of the carried object according to the fiducial mark information obtained from fiducial mark identification device, reads on calculating the position of the transfer target based on the first detection result(which is obtained from first detecting part)__, claim 10, “calculating the optimized path for the transporting device traveling to the carried object according to the topological positions of the carried object”, Claim 14., “acquiring a coordinate of the target position”), and control the travel of the mobile body based on calculation results of the position and ([0009], “transporting device to travel to the position of the carried object according to the travel instruction; ”[0031], [0034], [0072], “identifying the coordinate of at least one carried object 3”, “transporting device 2 travels to the position of carried object 3 ”).
Wei doesn’t disclose that a detection range of the first detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal, a second detecting part mounted to the mobile body and located at a lower position than the first detecting part, the second detecting part being configured to detect at least one side surface of the transfer target, a detection range of the second detecting part being two- dimensional and horizontal; and receive a second detection result of the at least one side surface of the transfer target from the second detecting part and calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result, and control travel of the mobile body based on calculation results of the position and the posture.
Maki disclose a technique for mobile device applied to an environment such as a factory (at least [0014]) and teaches a detection range of the first detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal (at least Fig. 1, [0018], “two sensors 2 (2A, 2B) are installed in the moving body 1”, “each sensor 2 is a distance measuring sensor, and in particular, a two-dimensional laser scanner (laser range finder: sometimes referred to as LRF or the like)”, “The two-dimensional meaning is that the distance to the object can be detected in a plane (horizontal plane in this example) centered on the direction of the sensor 2. ”), a second detecting part mounted to the mobile body (at least [0018] and Fig. 2A, __sensor 2A and 2B__), and located at a lower position than the first detecting part (Fig 2A, __sensor 2B reads on second detecting part which is located at a lower position than sensor 2A which reads on first detecting par);
Takao, US 20230348247 A1, teaches the second detecting part being configured to detect at least one side surface of the transfer target ([0051], 0070], “The target object information acquisition unit 74 shown in FIG. 5 acquires the detection result of the position information of the pallet P as a target object from the sensor 26 of the mobile machine 10 at the starting position AR1.”, __pallet in Takao disclosure is the transfer target__), a detection range of the second detecting part being two- dimensional and horizontal ([0067], “a position indicates two-dimensional coordinates in the region A unless otherwise described.”, [0070], “scanning in the lateral direction (horizontal direction) while the mobile machine 10 is running on the route R.”); receive a second detection result of the at least one side surface of the transfer target from the second detecting part ([0051], [0071], “The direction of the pallet P indicates a direction in which the pallet P faces the mobile machine 10, and more specifically, indicates a direction in which the front surface Pa of the pallet P faces the starting position AR1.”, [101], “detect the position and the direction of the pallet P from the side,”) and calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result ([0134], “The sensor 26 emits laser light while scanning in one direction (here, a lateral direction) and detects the position and the posture of the object from reflected light of emitted laser light”, [0155]), and control travel of the mobile body based on calculation results of the position and the posture ([0135], “The control device 28 controls the movement of the mobile machine 10.”, [0148], “The control device 28 sets the trajectory TR1 to the target position/posture AR2 based on the detection result of the position or on the posture of the pallet P in the sensor 26 of the mobile machine 10.”).
Furthermore, according to the 112f interpretation of first and second detecting part being a distance sensor or a laser rangefinder (LRF) (See section Claim Interpretation on Page 2 of the present office action), although the detecting part in Wei reference (that reads on first detecting part in the claim) is a visual sensor, but Wei, doesn’t recite that the detecting part (identification device) is a laser rangefinder. However, Maki teaches a detecting part being a laser range finder (See the rejection of claim 22), and it would be obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to substitute a visual sensor taught by Wei, which reads on first detecting part in the claim for detecting a detection object, with a laser rangefinder as taught by Maki to detect the detection objects and arrive at the similar invention.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the transporting device with first and second detecting parts as taught by Wei and substitute it with a first and second detecting part/sensors (at least according to paragraph [0018] and Fig. 1 of Maki), with distance sensor/laser range finder with two-dimensional detection range as taught by Maki, and further modified it to use the second detecting part to calculate the posture of the target object (transfer object) and control the transporting device base on the results of the calculated position and posture of the target object as taught by Wei in view of Takao, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the efficiency and precision of controlling mobile body by increasing the accuracy of detecting the target object in a two dimensional detection range, by knowing the object’s orientation and position that allows the mobile device to align itself properly for picking, moving, etc. of the target object and it ensures accurate, safe and efficient transfer.
Regarding claim 3, Wei discloses the control device causes the mobile body to travel toward the transfer target to which the detected detection object is mounted. ([0009], “transporting device to travel to the position of the carried object according to the travel instruction; ”[0031], [0034], [0072], “identifying the coordinate of at least one carried object 3”, “transporting device 2 travels to the position of carried object 3 ”, ([0081], “Carried object identification device 4 can be a fiducial mark identification device 41, used for identifying fiducial mark 31”, [0008], “fiducial mark is provided on the top of the carried object”).
Regarding claim 9, Wei in view of Maki teaches the system according to claim 1, however, Wei doesn’t teach wherein the first detecting part is mounted to the mobile body.
Maki teaches the first detecting part is mounted to the mobile body. (Fig 1, __sensor 2A__, [0018]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transporting device as taught by modified Wei, to include the detecting part mounted to the mobile body, as taught by Maki, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation to increase the accuracy and efficiency in the performance of the transferring system
Regarding claims 13 and 17, Wei discloses a control device configured to (and a method for controlling) control a mobile body that travels and transfers a transfer target (([0008], “transporting device with a carried object”, “mobile robot”, [0020], “control unit”, [0021]-[0023]), the control device being configured to: receive a detection result of a detection object from a first detecting part ([0081], “fiducial mark identification device 41, used for identifying fiducial mark 31, and acquiring the coordinate of at least one carried object 3 according to the information carried by fiducial mark 31.”, [0084]) , the detection object and (([0081], “fiducial mark 31”, “fiducial mark 31 is provided on the top of carried object 3.”, __Note: according to the rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C § 112 (a), See page 7 of the present office action, this limitation is interpreted according to the disclosure of the instant application as the first detecting part being mounted to the mobile body __, therefore, for the mapping of the limitation of the first detecting part being mounted to the mobile body, see paragraph 35 of the present office action, i.e. rejection of claim 9), the detection object being located at a higher position than the transfer target when referenced to a surface on which the mobile body travels ([0081], “fiducial mark 31”, “fiducial mark 31 is provided on the top of carried object 3.”, __fiducial mark on top of the carried object reads on detection object mounted to the object at a higher position than the object __), the first detecting part being located at a higher position than the transfer target when referenced to the surface (or according to claims 17 and 19, the first detecting part being located at a higher position than the transfer target and located at the same position or higher compared with a top of the mobile body when referenced to the surface) ([0081], “used for identifying fiducial mark 31, and acquiring the coordinate of at least one carried object 3 according to the information carried by fiducial mark 31.”), calculate a position of the transfer target based on the first detection result (__Note: since the calculation of the position of the transfer target is based on the first detecting result, position is interpreted as coordinate/location of the transfer target__, [0081], “acquiring the coordinate of at least one carried object 3 according to the information carried by fiducial mark 31.”, __acquiring the coordinate of the carried object according to the fiducial mark information obtained from fiducial mark identification device, reads on calculating the position of the transfer target based on the first detection result(which is obtained from first detecting part)__, claim 10, “calculating the optimized path for the transporting device traveling to the carried object according to the topological positions of the carried object”, Claim 14., “acquiring a coordinate of the target position”), and control the travel of the mobile body based on calculation results of the position and ([0009], “transporting device to travel to the position of the carried object according to the travel instruction; ”[0031], [0034], [0072], “identifying the coordinate of at least one carried object 3”, “transporting device 2 travels to the position of carried object 3 ”).
Wei doesn’t disclose the following limitations:
a detection range of the first detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal,
receive a second detection result of the transfer target from a second detecting part, the second detecting part mounted to the mobile body and located at a lower position than the first detecting part, a detection range of the second detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal. calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result
control the travel of the mobile body based on calculation results of the position and the posture
Maki disclose a technique for mobile device applied to an environment such as a factory (at least [0014]) and teaches a detection range of the first detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal (at least Fig. 1, [0018], “two sensors 2 (2A, 2B) are installed in the moving body 1”, “each sensor 2 is a distance measuring sensor, and in particular, a two-dimensional laser scanner (laser range finder: sometimes referred to as LRF or the like)”, “The two-dimensional meaning is that the distance to the object can be detected in a plane (horizontal plane in this example) centered on the direction of the sensor 2. ”).
Maki teaches receive a second detection result of the transfer target from a second detecting part (at least [0018] and Fig. 2A, __sensor 2A and 2B__), the second detecting part mounted to the mobile body and located at a lower position than the first detecting part (Fig 2A, __sensor 2B reads on second detecting part which is located at a lower position than sensor 2A which reads on first detecting par),
Wei in view of Maki doesn’t explicitly disclose calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result.
However, Takao teaches a detection range of the second detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal ([0067], “a position indicates two-dimensional coordinates in the region A unless otherwise described.”, [0070], “scanning in the lateral direction (horizontal direction) while the mobile machine 10 is running on the route R.”); and calculate a posture of the transfer target based on the second detection result (Takao teaches the control device calculating a posture of the object based on detection results from the first and second detecting parts. (e.g., [0048], [0065], “the control device 28 sets the trajectory TR to the target position/posture AR2 based on a detection result of the position or the direction of the pallet P by the sensor 26 of the mobile machine 10.”) and control the travel of the mobile body based on calculation results of the position and the posture (Takao teaches the control device calculating a posture of the object based on detection results from the first and second detecting parts. (e.g., [0048], [0065], “the control device 28 sets the trajectory TR to the target position/posture AR2 based on a detection result of the position or the direction of the pallet P by the sensor 26 of the mobile machine 10.”).
Furthermore, according to the 112f interpretation of first and second detecting part being a distance sensor or a laser rangefinder (LRF) (See section Claim Interpretation on Page 2 of present office action), although the detecting part in Wei reference (that reads on first detecting part in the claim) is a visual sensor, but Wei, doesn’t recite that the detecting part (identification device) is a laser rangefinder. However, Maki teaches a detecting part being a laser range finder (See the rejection of claim 22), and it would be obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to substitute a visual sensor taught by Wei, which reads on first detecting part in the claim for detecting a detection object, with a laser rangefinder as taught by Maki to detect the detection objects and arrive at the similar claimed invention.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the transporting device with first and second detecting parts as taught by Wei and substitute it with a first and second detecting part/sensors (at least according to paragraph [0018] and Fig. 1 of Maki), with distance sensor/laser range finder with two-dimensional detection range as taught by Maki, and further modified it to use the second detecting part to calculate the posture of the target object (transfer object) and control the transporting device base on the results of the calculated position and posture of the target object as taught by Wei in view of Takao, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the efficiency and precision of controlling mobile body by increasing the accuracy of detecting the target object in a two dimensional detection range, by knowing the object’s orientation and position that allows the mobile device to align itself properly for picking, moving, etc. of the target object and it ensures accurate, safe and efficient transfer.
Regarding claim 15, Wei discloses A mobile body that travels ([0008], “transporting device with a carried object”, “mobile robot,) the mobile body comprising: a first detecting part located at a higher position than a transfer target when referenced to a surface on which the mobile body travels ([0081], “Carried object identification device 4 can be a fiducial mark identification device 41, used for identifying fiducial mark 31”, “Fiducial mark identification device 41 is provided on the top of work space 1 […] located above the top of carried object 3”), the first detecting part being configured to detect a detection object mounted to the transfer target ([0081], “used for identifying fiducial mark 31, and acquiring the coordinate of at least one carried object 3 according to the information carried by fiducial mark 31.”), the detection object being located at a higher position than the transfer target when referenced to the surface ([0081], “fiducial mark 31”, “fiducial mark 31 is provided on the top of carried object 3.”, __fiducial mark on top of the carried object reads on detection object mounted to the object at a higher position than the object __), a position of the transfer target being calculated based on the first detection result (__Note: since the calculation of the position of the transfer target is based on the first detecting result, position is interpreted as coordinate/location of the transfer target__, [0081], “acquiring the coordinate of at least one carried object 3 according to the information carried by fiducial mark 31.”, __acquiring the coordinate of the carried object according to the fiducial mark information obtained from fiducial mark identification device, reads on calculating the position of the transfer target based on the first detection result(which is obtained from first detecting part)__, claim 10, “calculating the optimized path for the transporting device traveling to the carried object according to the topological positions of the carried object”, Claim 14., “acquiring a coordinate of the target position”)
Wei doesn’t disclose that a detection range of the first detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal, and a second detecting part mounted to the mobile body and located at a lower position than the first detecting part, the second detecting part being configured to detect the transfer target, a detection range of the second detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal, a position of the transfer target being calculated based on the first detection result, a posture of the transfer target being calculated based on the second detection result, the travel of the mobile body being controlled based on calculation results of the position and the posture.
However, Maki disclose a technique for mobile device applied to an environment such as a factory (at least [0014]) and teaches a detection range of the first detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal (at least Fig. 1, [0018], “two sensors 2 (2A, 2B) are installed in the moving body 1”, “each sensor 2 is a distance measuring sensor, and in particular, a two-dimensional laser scanner (laser range finder: sometimes referred to as LRF or the like)”, “The two-dimensional meaning is that the distance to the object can be detected in a plane (horizontal plane in this example) centered on the direction of the sensor 2. ”), and a second detecting part mounted to the mobile body (at least [0018] and Fig. 2A, __sensor 2A and 2B__), and located at a lower position than the first detecting part (Fig 2A, __sensor 2B reads on second detecting part which is located at a lower position than sensor 2A which reads on first detecting par);
And, Takao teaches the second detecting part being configured to detect the transfer target ([0051], [0070], “The target object information acquisition unit 74 shown in FIG. 5 acquires the detection result of the position information of the pallet P as a target object from the sensor 26 of the mobile machine 10 at the starting position AR1.”), a detection range of the second detecting part being two-dimensional and horizontal ([0067], “a position indicates two-dimensional coordinates in the region A unless otherwise described.”, [0070], “scanning in the lateral direction (horizontal direction) while the mobile machine 10 is running on the route R.”), a posture of the transfer target being calculated based on the second detection result ([0070], “acquires the detection result of the position information of the pallet P as a target object from the sensor 26 of the mobile machine 10”, ([0134], “The sensor 26 emits laser light while scanning in one direction (here, a lateral direction) and detects the position and the posture of the object from reflected light of emitted laser light”, [0155])), the travel of the mobile body being controlled based on calculation results of the position and the posture ([0135], “The control device 28 controls the movement of the mobile machine 10.”, [0148], “The control device 28 sets the trajectory TR1 to the target position/posture AR2 based on the detection result of the position or on the posture of the pallet P in the sensor 26 of the mobile machine 10.”).
Furthermore, according to the 112f interpretation of first and second detecting part being a distance sensor or a laser rangefinder (LRF) (See section Claim Interpretation on Page 2 of present office action), although the detecting part in Wei reference (that reads on first detecting part in the claim) is a visual sensor, but Wei, doesn’t recite that the detecting part (identification device) is a laser rangefinder. However, Maki teaches a detecting part being a laser range finder (See the rejection of claim 22), and it would be obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to substitute a visual sensor taught by Wei, which reads on first detecting part in the claim for detecting a detection object, with a laser rangefinder as taught by Maki to detect the detection objects and arrive at the similar invention.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the transporting device with first and second detecting parts as taught by Wei and substitute it with a first and second detecting part/sensors (at least according to paragraph [0018] and Fig. 1 of Maki), with distance sensor/laser range finder with two-dimensional detection range as taught by Maki, and further modified it to use the second detecting part to calculate the posture of the target object (transfer object) and control the transporting device base on the results of the calculated position and posture of the target object as taught by Wei in view of Takao, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the efficiency and precision of controlling mobile body by increasing the accuracy of detecting the target object in a two dimensional detection range, by knowing the object’s orientation and position that allows the mobile device to align itself properly for picking, moving, etc. of the target object and it ensures accurate, safe and efficient transfer.
Regarding claim 19, all the limitations are similar to claims 13 and 17 for a non-transitory medium. Therefore, all the limitations are rejected based on the same mapping used for the rejections of claims 13 and 17 (See rejections for claims 13 and 17). Further, regarding claim 19, Wei doesn’t explicitly disclose a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program, that causes a computer to control a mobile body that travels. However, Wei refers to storing data in paragraphs (e.g., [0008], “identifying the fiducial mark and acquiring the coordinate of the carried object, and storing the coordinate of the carried object into a position management system.”) and also recites terms like “automatically” (e.g., [0034], “the transporting device can automatically adjust direction”) or “robot”. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention would understand that these functions would routinely and conventionally be performed by a computer. Also, non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is a common and well-known component of a conventional computer. Furthermore, Maki also teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program (Maki, [0066] “The memory 603 stores a control program 630”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the transporting device as taught by modified Wei, with non-transitory medium storing a program as a common part of a controlling device and also as taught by Maki, with a reasonable expectation of success, with motivation of storing a control device computer program.
Regarding claim 21, Wei in view of Maki teaches the system according to claim 1, and although Wei discloses/describes using distance sensor on the body of transporting vehicle, according to paragraph [0006], however, Wei doesn’t explicitly teach herein the first detecting part includes a distance sensor.
Maki teaches the first detecting part includes a distance sensor ([0002], [0018]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the first detecting part of the transporting device as taught by modified Wei with a distance sensor as taught by Maki, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of using a type of sensor capable of measuring the distance to the target object.
Regarding claim 22, Wei in view of Maki teaches the system according to claim 1, however, however, although Wei teaches identification device for identifying the fiducial marker being a visual laser(at least paragraph [0008]), but, Wei doesn’t teach wherein the first detecting part is a laser rangefinder, and the laser rangefinder scans a laser beam ([0018], “a two-dimensional laser scanner (laser range finder: sometimes called LRF or the like”) and receives the reflected light reflected from the detection object.
Maki teaches the first detecting part is a laser rangefinder ([0018], “a laser range finder”), and the laser rangefinder is configured to scan a laser beam and receives the reflected light reflected from the detection object ([0038], “The sensor 2 emits laser light while scanning […] and the laser light returning from that characteristic point”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the transporting device as taught by modified Wei with the laser rangefinder as taught by Maki, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of measuring distance data to the surfaces of physical objects in the surrounding area at multiple points in order to have precise measurements and improve the performance of the transporting device.
Claims 4, 14, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Wei in view of Maki and Takao, further in view of Diankov, US 11648676 B2, hereinafter “Diankov”.
Regarding claim 4, Wei in view of Maki teaches the system according to claim 1, however, Wei in view of Maki and Takao doesn’t explicitly disclose when the mobile body transfers an other transfer target, the control device causes the mobile body to travel to a position next to the transfer target to which the detected detection object is mounted.
However, Diankov teaches when the mobile body transfers an other transfer target, the control device causes the mobile body to travel to a position next to the transfer target to which the detected detection object is mounted. (Page 25 Col 10, Line 41-44, “The robotic system 100 can place the new target object 402 at a designated location, which can be adjacent to and/or over the previously placed/targeted object 112.”, __new target object reads on another object__, Page 28, Col 16, Line 53-57), “the robotic system 100 can move the transfer tray 506 […] to locations adjacent to and/or over the source container 304”, Page 32, Col 23, Line 32-34, “the transfer tray 506 can include an identification sensor (e.g., the RFID sensor or the visual code sensor) that identifies the object placed on the tray. ”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transporting system as taught by modified Wei, to include the control device cause the mobile device which carry another object to travel to a position next to the object to which detected detection object is mounted, as taught by Diankov, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation to increase the accuracy and efficiency in the performance of the transferring system.
Regarding claims 14, 16 and 18, Wei in view of Maki and Takao discloses wherein the mobile body is caused to travel toward the transfer target to which the detected detection object is mounted ([0009], “transporting device to travel to the position of the carried object according to the travel instruction; ”[0031], [0034], [0072], “identifying the coordinate of at least one carried object 3”, “transporting device 2 travels to the position of carried object 3 ”, ([0081], “Carried object identification device 4 can be a fiducial mark identification device 41, used for identifying fiducial mark 31”, [0008], “fiducial mark is provided on the top of the carried object”).
Wei in view of Maki doesn’t teach when the mobile body transfers an other transfer target, the mobile body is caused to travel to a position next to the transfer target to which the detected detection object is mounted.
However, Diankov teaches when the mobile body transfers an other transfer target, the control device causes the mobile body to travel to a position next to the object to which the detected detection object is mounted. (Page 25 Col 10, Line 41-44, “The robotic system 100 can place the new target object 402 at a designated location, which can be adjacent to and/or over the previously placed/targeted object 112.”, __new target object reads on another object__, Page 28, Col 16, Line 53-57), “the robotic system 100 can move the transfer tray 506 […] to locations adjacent to and/or over the source container 304”, Page 32, Col 23, Line 32-34, “the transfer tray 506 can include an identification sensor (e.g., the RFID sensor or the visual code sensor) that identifies the object placed on the tray. ”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transporting system as taught by modified Wei, to include the control device cause the mobile device which carry another object to travel to a position next to the object to which detected detection object is mounted, as taught by Diankov, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation to increase the accuracy and efficiency in the performance of the transferring system.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei in view of Maki and Takao, further in view of Matsumoto et al., US 20090012667 A1, hereinafter “Matsumoto”.
Regarding claim 5, Wei in view of Maki teaches the system according to claim 1, however, Wein in view of Maki doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the control device determines an existence or absence of the transfer target at a position of the detected detection object by comparing the position of the detection object with a stop position of the transfer target on a map.
However, Matsumoto teaches wherein the control device determines an existence or absence of the transfer target at a position of the detected detection object by comparing the position of the detection object with a stop position of the object on a map ([0059], [0061], [0081], [0085], [0087], [0094], [0155]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of controlling a transporting device as taught by modified Wei, to include the step of comparing the position of the detection object obtained from the sensor with the position of the object in the map as taught by Matsumoto and use it in determining whether the detection object is actually located at the position of the detected detection object in order to prevent the system from mis-detecting any other object (rather than the target detection object) located in the position of detected detection object (as described in paragraph [0058] of the present application), with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation to increase the accuracy and efficiency in the performance of the mobile device in the transferring system.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei in view of Maki, further in view in view of Kato, US 20240345597 A1, hereinafter “Kato”.
Regarding claim 8, Wei discloses a plurality of the detection objects is mounted to the transfer target ([0081], “each carried object 3 is provided with at least one fiducial mark 31”).
Wei doesn’t teach the transfer target includes a door, the door being openable and closable, one of the plurality of detection objects is mounted to the door, and the control device calculates a state of the door based on detection results of the plurality of detection objects from the first detecting part.
However, Kato teaches the transfer target includes a door, the door being openable and closable, one of the plurality of detection objects is mounted to the door, and the control device calculates a state of the door based on detection results of the plurality of detection objects from the first detecting part ([0069], “ the recognition of the pose of the door”, “The marker 2c is placed on the back face 2b of the door 2”, “The surrounding environment recognition unit 81 recognizes the pose of the door 2, based on the marker 2c appearing in the captured image generated by the image generation means 41.”, [0064])
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transporting device as taught by modified Wei to include the plurality of detection objects mounted to a door as taught by Kato, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of enhancing the safety and efficiency of the transfer system.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei in view of Maki, further in view of Prasad, US 20240303598 A1, hereinafter “Prasad”.
Regarding claim 10, Wei in view of Maki teaches the system according to claim 1, however, Wei doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the detection object is mounted by a human to the transfer target determined to be transferred.
Nevertheless, the claim is a product by process claim and the limitation of the detection object is mounted to the transfer target by a human doesn’t add any real limitation unless it impacts the structure/functionality of the device. In other words, whether the detection object is mounted by a person or by a machine, doesn’t make any difference in the structure.
However, for the purpose of compact persecution, this feature is taught by Prasad. Prasad teaches the detection object is mounted to the transfer target by a human ([0100], “operator places the new labels on the item.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transfer system as taught by Kawaguchi to include the plurality of detection objects mounted on the object as taught by Wei and the detection objects being mounted on the object by a human as taught by Prasad, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of having a real-person control by using an operator in order to selectively mount the objection detection on the objects that are scheduled to be transferred by the mobile device.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei in view of Maki, further in view of Kitano, US 20200401158 A1, hereinafter “Kitano”.
Regarding claim 11, Wei in view of Maki teaches the system according to claim 1, however, Wei doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the detection object includes a reflective material. Maki teaches the laser light hits the object and is reflected; however, Maki doesn’t explicitly teach the detection object includes a reflective material.
However, Kitano teaches wherein the detection object includes a reflective material. ([0011] “marker including first cells capable of reflecting emitted light”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transporting device as taught by modified Wei to include detection objects as a reflective material as taught by Kitano, with a reasonable expectation of success, because using a detection object with a reflective material mounted on the object enhances detection accuracy and reliability, especially in low-light or visually complex environment.
Regarding claim 12, Wei in view of Maki discloses the system according to claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of the first detecting parts (Fig. 2: 41, [0072], “Carried object identification devices 4 can be evenly distributed within the whole work space”),
Wei in view of Maki doesn’t explicitly teach wherein when the detection object is detected by the plurality of first detecting parts, the control device controls the travel of the mobile body based on a detection result from the first detecting part most proximate to the detection object.
However, Kitano teaches wherein when the detection object is detected by the plurality of first detecting parts, the control device controls the travel of the mobile body based on a detection result from the first detecting part most proximate to the detection object. ([0011], “the calculator selects the detection object at a position nearest to the detector,”, “Selection of the marker serving as the detection object at the position nearest to the detector by the calculator is determined based on the distance between the detector and the selected marker.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transporting device as taught by modified Wei to include the control device which controls the travel of the mobile body based on a detection result from the first detecting part most proximate to the detection object as taught by Kitano, with the reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of increasing the accuracy and efficiency of the transfer mobile device performance.
Documents Considered but not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Francis et al., US6600418B2, discloses object tracking and management systems and methods, that use a combination of mobile and/or stationary radio-frequency identification tags to identify, monitor the locations of, and direct movements of objects.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAJAR HASSANIARDEKANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8 am-5 pm ET.
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, Erin Piateski can be reached at 5712707429. 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.
/H.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/Erin M Piateski/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669