DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communications filed on 4/30/2025.
The Examiner notes claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Please see the Response to Amendments and Response to Arguments sections below for more details.
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) 1-9, 13-15, 17, & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ziegler et al. (US 20080134458), hereinafter Ziegler.
Regarding claim 1 & 13. Ziegler discloses a floor cleaning system [Fig 1; ¶135; a robot and docking station form the system], comprising: a robot [100], comprising: a chassis [200]; a set of wheels [902 & 904]; a processor [¶132; 300 includes a processor]; a plurality of sensors [¶139; 340]; a vacuum module [¶17, ¶146, & ¶151; the first cleaning zone A is a vacuum module that functions separate from the wet-cleaning functionality (i.e. mopping module)]; a mopping module [¶17, ¶19, ¶151, & ¶156; second cleaning zone B is the mopping module]; a dustbin module for storing debris [¶17 & ¶22; the first storage container]; a cleaning fluid tank module for storing cleaning fluid [¶24, ¶42, & ¶152; “S”]; and a rechargeable battery module [¶20 & ¶133; 310 is a module that includes a battery]; and a base station [¶26 & ¶135; the docking station is an element external to the robot]; wherein: the base station is configured to empty debris stored within the dustbin module [¶26, ¶134, & ¶137; the docking station empties the waste storage container(s)]; the base station is configured to replenish the cleaning fluid tank module with cleaning fluid [¶26, ¶134, & ¶137; the docking station refills the liquid storage container]; and the robot navigates to the base station when a rechargeable battery charge of the rechargeable battery module is below a first threshold during operation and departs the base station to continue operation when the rechargeable battery charge is above a second threshold [¶137, ¶139, & ¶374; the sensors monitor battery power (see ¶139, which includes voltage, see ¶349) and when the sensors detects that the battery voltage is low (i.e. below a first threshold) the robot then navigates back to the base station (paragraph 137 & 139). In ¶137, a base station is used to autonomously recharge and perform other maintenance services to the robot. ¶137 states that US patent application 10/762,219 (Cohen et al. US 20050156562) AUTONOMOUS ROBOT AUTO-DOCKING AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND METHODS is incorporated in its entirety. In ¶76 of Cohen, the robot has a sensor to detect the quantity of energy in the battery ( either the current or voltage of the battery). In ¶78 of Cohen, the robot detect energy below a predetermined low level (i.e. first threshold) and the robot then begins to navigate back to the base station. Further in ¶91 of Cohen, the robot can fully recharge or charge to a sufficient level (i.e. above a second threshold) before returning to a cleaning operations. These structures and functions are incorporated into Ziegler's robot.].
Regarding claim 2 & 14. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein the base station is configured to clean at least a portion of the mopping module [¶156; the mopping module includes a liquid waste storage module and ¶380; the dirty liquid tank can be emptied by the docking station].
Regarding claim 3 & 15. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein the robot navigates to the base station to empty the debris stored in the dustbin module based on a particular interval [¶131, ¶212; the robot can run for a particular interval of time (i.e. the waste container is full) or after traveling for a 45 min interval (other intervals are possible per ¶131) the robot returns to the docking stations to empty the waste container; it is noted that “a particular interval” is not defined].
Regarding claim 4 & 16. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein the robot navigates to the base station to empty the debris stored in the dustbin module based on at least a user instruction [¶26 & ¶144; the user gives commands to the robot which includes stopping cleaning which would send it back to the docking station for charging and other maintenance operations (¶349); US Application 11/166,891 (US 20050287038) which is incorporated into Ziegler in ¶45-¶46 a user can start a pre-programed task for the robot including returning to the docking station when the dirt compartment is full].
Regarding claim 5 & 17. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein: a first sensor of the plurality of sensors indicates an amount of cleaning fluid stored within the cleaning fluid tank module; and the robot navigates to the base station to replenish the cleaning fluid tank module with cleaning fluid based on the amount of cleaning fluid stored within the cleaning fluid tank module [¶139 & ¶380; the sensor module is connected to a sensor that detects low/empty cleaning fluid (Note: an empty tank is an amount of cleaning fluid, i.e. zero fluid) and then would return to the docking station to refill (¶380)].
Regarding claim 6 & 18. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein the robot navigates to the base station to replenish the cleaning fluid tank module with cleaning fluid based on at least user instruction [¶26, ¶144, & ¶212; the user gives commands to the robot which includes stopping cleaning which would send it back to the docking station for charging and other maintenance operations which include refilling the cleaning fluid tank (¶212); ¶144 of Ziegler discloses that US Application 11/166,891 Dubrovsky et al. (US 20050287038) is incorporated into Ziegler; in ¶45-¶46 of Dubrovsky a user can start a pre-programed task for the robot which one of the pre-programed tasks in Ziegler is returning to the docking station when the cleaning fluid tank is empty].
Regarding claim 7 & 19. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein: a second sensor of the plurality of sensors indicates an amount of debris stored within the dustbin module; and the robot navigates to the base station to empty the dustbin based on the amount of debris stored within the dustbin module [¶139; if the sensor module detects with a sensor that the dustbin module is full it can return to the docking station to empty the dustbin module (¶349)].
Regarding claim 8. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein the robot further comprises a voltmeter configured to detect the rechargeable battery charge of the rechargeable battery module [¶137, ¶139, & ¶374; the sensors monitor battery power (see ¶139), which includes voltage (see ¶349) and has a voltmeter].
Regarding claim 9. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, wherein at least odometry information is used in navigating the robot [¶139; drive wheel travel distance is detected/measured by the sensor module].
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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziegler et al. (US 20080134458) in view of Ruffner (US 20020156556), hereinafter Ruffner.
Regarding claim 10. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, but is silent in regards to wherein at least one other robot shares the base station with the robot.
However Ruffner discloses a mobile cleaning robot system, wherein at least one other robot shares the base station with the robot [¶53; multiple robots (1) can operate in a given system with at least one docking station (2)].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the robot system as disclosed by Ziegler to have at least one other robot sharing the base station with the robot as taught by Ruffner for the purpose of cleaning more areas with simultaneous clean and/or continuous cleaning with one robot cleaning while the other is performing maintenance operations at the docking station.
Claim(s) 11-12 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziegler et al. (US 20080134458) in view of Hahm et al. (US 20070245511), hereinafter Hahm.
Regarding claim 11. Ziegler discloses the floor cleaning system of claim 1, but is silent in regards to wherein the base station comprises: a first repository for storing one or more used modules; and a second repository for storing one or more new modules corresponding to a robot cleaning function, the one or more new modules having never been used previously by the floor cleaning system.
However Hahm discloses a base station for a robot vacuum wherein the base station comprises: a first repository for storing one or more used modules [Fig 7-8; ¶110; 460]; and a second repository for storing one or more new modules corresponding to a robot cleaning function, the one or more new modules having never been used previously by the floor cleaning system [Fig 7-8; ¶99; 450 are new disposable modules for the robot].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the base station as disclosed by Ziegler to have the base station comprises: a first repository for storing one or more used modules; and a second repository for storing one or more new modules corresponding to a robot cleaning function, the one or more new modules having never been used previously by the floor cleaning system as taught by Hahm for the purpose of preventing leakage of waste or fluid when emptying or refilling containers or tanks in the robot by the base station [Hahm: ¶112].
Regarding claim 12. Ziegler as modified teaches the floor cleaning system of claim 11, but is silent in regards to wherein: the robot ejects a used module from a module slot of the robot into the first repository of the base station; and the base station loads a new module from the second repository of the base station into the module slot of the robot.
Hahm further discloses wherein: the robot ejects a used module from a module slot of the robot into the first repository of the base station; and the base station loads a new module from the second repository of the base station into the module slot of the robot [Hahm: Fig 7-8; ¶98-¶99].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the robot and base station as taught by Ziegler as modified to have the robot eject a used module from a module slot of the robot into the first repository of the base station; and the base station loads a new module from the second repository of the base station into the module slot of the robot as disclosed by Hahm for the purpose fully automating the replacing of a cleaning modules so the user does not have to stop and perform the maintenance of the robot [Hahm: ¶17].
Regarding claim 20. Claim(s) 20 recite(s) the same, similar limitations as those addressed for claim(s) 11-12. The differences are addressed below:
Claim 20 has the combined limitations of claims 11-12
Claim(s) 20 is/are therefore rejected for the same reasons set forth for claim(s) 11-12.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 112(b) Rejection
Applicant's amendments and arguments, see Pages 1, filed 8/26/2024 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of 8/13/2024 are withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. 102 & 103 Rejection
Applicant's arguments, see Pages 2-5, filed 8/26/2024 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
The Applicant claims that the prior art is silent in regards to "a robot navigating to the base station when a rechargeable battery charge of the rechargeable battery module is below a first threshold during operation and departs the base station to continue operation when the rechargeable battery charge is above a second threshold." Specifically the Applicant argues that the "indicator" on the robot of Ziegler (paragraph 374) used to indicate that the battery is fully charged is not equivalent to the second threshold. However, when a sensor of the sensor module (item 340) detects that the battery voltage is low (i.e. below a first threshold) the robot then navigates back to the base station (¶139 discloses detecting low battery power, ¶349 & ¶359 disclose that battery voltage is being sensed, and ¶137 discloses returning to the base station to recharge the battery). In addition ¶137 of Ziegler states that US patent application 10/762,219 (Cohen et al. US 20050156562) AUTONOMOUS ROBOT AUTO-DOCKING AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND METHODS is incorporated in its entirety. In ¶76 of Cohen, the robot has a sensor to detect the quantity of energy in the battery ( either the current or voltage of the battery). In ¶78 of Cohen, the robot detect energy below a predetermined low level (i.e. first threshold) and the robot then begins to navigate back to the base station. Further in ¶91 of Cohen, the robot can fully recharge or charge to a sufficient level (i.e. above a second threshold) before returning to a cleaning operations. These structures and functions are incorporated into Ziegler's robot. Further ¶374 disclose the power button is illuminated differently for different levels of battery power. Specifically the button illuminates solid green for fully charged. This discloses that the battery is above a second threshold and can continue operating because once a battery is fully recharged the robot can continue operating and as the light will only be solid green if the battery is fully charged then there is a sensor to detect the battery charge and will send a signal to illuminate the button solid green only if the battery power levels meet the condition of being fully charged which is equivalent to having the battery be above a second threshold. Therefore the rejection is maintained.
The Applicant claims the prior art is silent in regards to "a robot navigating to the base station to empty the debris stored in the dustbin module based on a particular interval." The Applicant further argues that Ziegler navigates to the base station at intervals of 45 min but cannot be considered a particular interval because the 45 min are dependent on the charge of a battery. The Applicant claims further claims that that the claims disclose the robot emptying the dustbin each time it returns to the base station.However the claim is that the robot goes to the base station to empty debris based on a particular interval of some kind. The type of interval is not specified in the claim. It could be time based, battery charge based, debris canister fill level based, or clean fluid tank based. Ziegler discloses in ¶131, “the robot systems are configured (physically, and as programmed) for unattended autonomous cleaning for 45 minutes or more without the need to recharge a power supply, refill the supply of cleaning fluid or empty the waste materials collected by the robot.” This indicates that after the interval of time the robot may need to return to the base station after the interval of the battery being low charge, the cleaning fluid tank is low/empty, or the waste collection container is full. Each of these are condition for a particular interval to return to the base station. Therefore the interval can be based on navigating to the base station to empty the debris stored in the dustbin module. It is noted that nowhere in claim 3 or 15 is there any indication or limitations of the dustbin being emptied each return to the base station. Therefore the rejection is maintained.
The Applicant claims that Ziegler is silent with regards to "wherein: a first sensor of the plurality of sensors indicates an amount of cleaning fluid stored within the cleaning fluid tank module; and the robot navigates to the base station to replenish the cleaning fluid tank module with cleaning fluid based on the amount of cleaning fluid stored within the cleaning fluid tank module" (Claim 5). The Applicant argues that Ziegler discloses individual sensors that detect an empty cleaning fluid container (paragraph 139) and that the container being empty is not indicating an amount of cleaning fluid.However the Applicant has stated, “Ziegler discloses individual sensors may perform such functions as...detecting an empty cleaning fluid container (¶ 139).” The Examiner agrees that Ziegler does detect an empty cleaning fluid tank. But Examiner disagrees about the interpretation of “empty.” An empty tank has zero cleaning fluid. Zero is an indication of an amount. Therefore the limitation is met by the prior art and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON R MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (303)297-4608. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1600 MST [0900-1800 EST] 2nd Friday 0700-1500 MST [0900-1700 EST].
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, Eric Rosen can be reached on (571) 270-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AARON R MCCONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723