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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Fuhrer does not disclose a method for determining an occupancy situation of containers in a plant comprises inferring a container load on the basis of the speed of the containers and a theoretical transport speed, wherein a control signal for controlling the transport speed and/or transport direction is output if a predefined maximum is exceeded. However, Fuhrer clearly discloses a method for determining an occupancy situation of containers in a plant comprises inferring a container load on the basis of the speed of the containers and a theoretical transport speed, wherein a control signal for controlling the transport speed and/or transport direction is output if a predefined maximum is exceeded (‘corrective measures’ para 0045, 0047). Further, Fuhrer takes into account “theoretical transport speed” in the form of the ‘conveying speeds v1, v2, v3, v4 and v5’ and the speed of the containers (‘speed vectors of visible objects’ para 0036), and compares ‘optical flow’ to ‘stored flow’. Applicant’s specification does not define “theoretical transport speed” nor does it state how it is determined or how it is used to determine an occupancy situation. For at least the foregoing reasons claim 1 and its dependent claims stand rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1,2,8, and 10-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fuhrer US 2016/0052764.
Fuhrer discloses a method for determining an occupancy situation of containers in an installation, the method comprising:
(Re claim 1) “using at least one camera for capturing the occupancy situation of the containers in the installation and obtaining a captured occupancy situation” (10-1,10-2,11 figure 2). “analyzing the captured occupancy situation and obtaining an analyzed occupancy situation,” (‘loading density’ para 0045). “controlling the installation based on the analyzed occupancy situation” (‘loading density … under a given value … taking corrective measures’). “the use of the at least one camera for capturing the occupancy situation comprises recording of a video of the occupancy situation of the containers in the installation or real-time transmission of the occupancy situation of the containers in the installation” (‘video camera’ para 0023). “individual images of the video or of the real- time transmission are analyzed by means of an image recognition algorithm and containers present in the individual images are recognized at least on the basis of partial regions” (‘pattern recognition algorithms’ para 0046). “calculating a speed of the containers from the position of the container and a frame rate of at least one camera” (para 0018). a conclusion about a container load based on the speed of the containers and a theoretical transport speed, wherein, for example, an optical signal can be output if, a predetermined maximum value is exceeded, and/or wherein, for example, a control signal can be output for controlling the transport speed and/or transport direction, if the predetermined maximum value is exceeded” (‘corrective measures’ para 0045, 0047).
(Re claim 2) “determining positions of the containers on the basis of the captured occupancy situation” (‘position’ para 0017).
(Re claim 8) “a lens equation of the at least one camera and a plane that is located in the three-dimensional space and runs through all container upper sides are used for the conversion” (‘optical flow calculated … image plane of objects’ para 0017).
(Re claim 10) “pre-calculating a future position of the containers” (‘future position of objects’ para 0017).
(Re claim 11) “representing the analyzed occupancy situation on a display, wherein, for example, the representation comprises a representation of a current status of at least one of the containers” (‘filling level … other features’ para 0043).
(Re claim 12) “one or more evaluation regions for analyzing the captured occupancy situation are defined or can be defined” (‘camera provided in a region’, ’regions C … D and E’ para 0043).
(Re claim 13) “an automatic prediction takes place as to the time point at which one or more evaluation regions of the one or more evaluation regions operates at full or zero capacity, wherein, for example, an optical signal can be output if a maximum occupancy is exceeded or an occupancy falls below a minimum occupancy” (‘threshold is either exceeded or gone below’ para 0013, ‘under a given value’ para 0045, claim 13).
(Re claim 14) “an optical signal can be output if, a predetermined maximum value is exceeded” (‘optical flows’ para 0045, 0047).
(Re claim 15) “at least one camera is left at a location above the installation, or wherein the at least one camera 1s moved above the installation” (10-1, 10-2 figure 2).
(Re claim 16) “A device comprising at least one camera and a control device with instructions that are stored thereon and that, when executed by a processor, cause the control device to execute the method according to Claim 1” (10-1, 10-2, 11 figure 2).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuhrer in view of Cherevatsky et al. US 10,699,421.
Fuhrer discloses the system as rejected above.
(Re claim 5) “each of the recognized containers is assigned a unique identification, wherein, for example, the unique identification is determined” (‘identified and isolated’ para 0043).
Fuhrer does not disclose the use of a Kalman filter.
Cherevatsky teaches use of a Kalman filter (‘Kalman filter’ abstract, col 33 lines 21-29).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the system of Fuhrer to include the use of a Kalman filter because it is one of many well-known algorithms used in identifying and tracking objects reliably and would yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuhrer/Cherevatsky in view of Sugita US 2020/0151907
Fuhrer/Cherevatsky discloses the system as rejected above.
Fuhrer/Cherevatsky does not disclose automatically determining conversion parameters for the conversion based on a checkerboard pattern to which the at least one camera has been calibrated.
Sugita teaches automatically determining conversion parameters for the conversion based on a checkerboard pattern to which the at least one camera has been calibrated (‘checkerboard’ para 0003, 0042).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the system of Fuhrer/Cherevatsky to include automatically determining conversion parameters for the conversion based on a checkerboard pattern to which the at least one camera has been calibrated because it provides a means to easily determined a relationship between two coordinate systems.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY R WAGGONER whose telephone number is (571)272-8204. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 5am-330pm.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached at 571-270-3415. 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.
TIMOTHY R. WAGGONER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655 B
/TIMOTHY R WAGGONER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights