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 Amendment
This action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 05/01/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 3-5, 11-12, 14-17, and 19 have been amended. The abstract has been amended. The objection to the abstract has been withdrawn in light of the instant amendments. This action is made final, as necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments appear to be directed solely to the amended subject matter which have been considered and addressed as detailed below under Claim Rejections.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-8, 10, 12-13, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20200023511 A1) in view of Kwak (US 11137773 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a robot (Fig. 1, master robot 100) comprising:
a communication interface (Fig. 2, communication unit 110) configured to wirelessly communicate with an external robot (par. 37, “the communication unit 110 among the components may include one or more wired or wireless communication modules that enable communication between the master robot 100 and the slave robot”);
a sensor configured to obtain distance data (Fig. 2, input unit 120 and sensing unit 130);
a driver configured to control a movement of the robot (par. 46, “The mobile module 170 is a module for moving to a predetermined place under the control of the control module 190”);
a memory (Fig. 2, storage unit 150) storing map data corresponding to a space in which the robot travels (par. 47, “The control module 190 may create a space map corresponding to a predetermined space in which the master robot 100 and the slave robot 200 (for example, 200 in FIG. 3) are arranged”);
and a processor (Fig. 2, control module 190) configured to:
control the sensor to output a sensing signal for sensing a distance to the external robot (par. 51, “the control module 190 may control the input unit 120 or the sensing unit 130 to monitor movement of the slave robot 200”),
obtain position information of the external robot (par. 51, “the control module 190 may control the input unit 120 or the sensing unit 130 to monitor movement of the slave robot 200”),
control at least one of the driver or an operation state of the external robot based on the position information (par. 50, “When moving the slave robot 200 in a predetermined space, the control module 190 may move the slave robot 200 on the basis of the position information on the slave robots 200 in the space map and the image information collected from the camera 121”),
identify, based on an error occurring in the communication with the external robot (par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”), a pose of the external robot based on a type of the at least one (par. 51, “the control module 190 may control the input unit 120 or the sensing unit 130 to monitor movement of the slave robot 200”; par. 48, “The control module 190 may receive identification information or shape information on the slave robot 200 from the slave robot 200 through the communication unit 110 and apply the information onto the space map”),
identify a target position of the robot based on the pose of the external robot and the stored map data, wherein the target position is a position from which a visibility to the external robot is secured (par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”),
and control the driver to move to the target position to remove the error (the robot is controlled to move back into the image-capturing range).
Lee fails to teach obtain position information of the external robot based on a time at which at least one echo signal is received by the sensor from the external robot, and identify, based on an error occurring in the communication with the external robot through the communication interface, a pose of the external robot based on a type of the at least one echo signal received by the sensor from the external robot. Lee instead only teaches that the sensor is a camera or image input unit (column 4 line 42), which could not be considered an “echo signal”.
However, Kwak teaches obtain position information of the external robot based on a time at which at least one echo signal is received by the sensor from the external robot (Fig. 5C, second autonomous mobile robot 100b) based on a time at which at least one echo signal is received from the external robot (column 21 line 22, “The second signal may include delay time (t_reply) information which is calculated based on a time at which the first mobile robot 100a has received the first signal and a time at which the first mobile terminal 100a has output the second signal”; see column 21 lines 9-26),
and identify, based on an error occurring in the communication with the external robot through the communication interface, a pose of the external robot based on a type of the at least one echo signal received from the external robot (column 20 line 9, “To solve this problem, as illustrated in FIGS. 6A and 6B, the present invention can measure the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot by using UWB modules instead of the transmitting/receiving IR sensors”; column 22 line 34, “The present invention can calculate the relative positions (spatial coordinates) of the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b using the plurality of UWB anchors. The triangulation described in FIG. 6B will be equally/similarly applied to calculating the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot using three UWB anchors and one UWB tag” —Lee teaches the communication unit 110 may perform short range communication using infrared or ultra wideband (par. 39), so the error would occur through the communication interface).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace Lee’s sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Lee further teaches the processor is further configured to: identify, while communicating with the external robot through the communication interface, the pose of the external robot based on the type of the at least one echo signal received from the external robot, and transmit a control signal for changing the pose of the external robot to the external robot through the communication interface based on the pose of the external robot and the stored map data (par. 50, “When moving the slave robot 200 in a predetermined space, the control module 190 may move the slave robot 200 on the basis of the position information on the slave robots 200 in the space map and the image information collected from the camera 121”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Lee fails to teach the external robot comprises a plurality of sensors configured to output echo signals of different types and disposed at different positions, and wherein the processor is further configured to: identify, based on the error occurring in the communication with the external robot through the communication interface, the positions of the plurality of sensors, which output a plurality of echo signals from among the plurality of sensors disposed in the external robot, based on types of the plurality of echo signals received from the external robot, and identify the pose of the external robot based on the positions of the plurality of sensors.
However, Kwak teaches he external robot comprises a plurality of sensors configured to output echo signals of different types and disposed at different positions (Fig. 7A, UWB anchors 710b-1, 710b-2, and 710b-3) and wherein the processor is further configured to:
identify, based on an error occurring in the communication with the external robot through the communication interface, the positions of the plurality of sensors, which output a plurality of echo signals from among the plurality of sensors disposed in the external robot, based on types of the plurality of echo signals received from the external robot, and identify the pose of the external robot based on the positions of the plurality of sensors (column 20 line 9, “To solve this problem, as illustrated in FIGS. 6A and 6B, the present invention can measure the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot by using UWB modules instead of the transmitting/receiving IR sensors”; column 22 line 34, “The present invention can calculate the relative positions (spatial coordinates) of the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b using the plurality of UWB anchors. The triangulation described in FIG. 6B will be equally/similarly applied to calculating the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot using three UWB anchors and one UWB tag”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace Lee’s sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Lee further teaches the processor is further configured to identify, based on pose information being received from the external robot through the communication interface, the target position of the robot based on the pose information, the pose of the external robot, and the stored map data (par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Lee further teaches the sensor comprises a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensor (par. 42, sensing unit 130 can be a LiDAR sensor), and wherein the processor is further configured to obtain the position information of the external robot based on a sensing signal obtained by the LiDAR sensor (par. 51, “When moving the slave robot 200 on the basis of the space map, the control module 190 may control the input unit 120 or the sensing unit 130 to monitor movement of the slave robot 200. Accordingly, it is possible to intuitively recognize the slave robot 200 by the master robot 100”)
Lee fails to teach obtain the position information of the external robot based on the time at which the at least one echo signal is received from the external robot.
However, Kwak teaches obtain the position information of the external robot based on the time at which the at least one echo signal is received from the external robot (column 21 line 22, “The second signal may include delay time (t_reply) information which is calculated based on a time at which the first mobile robot 100a has received the first signal and a time at which the first mobile terminal 100a has output the second signal”; see column 21 lines 9-26).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace Lee’s sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Lee further teaches the sensor comprises a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensor (par. 42, sensing unit 130 can be a LiDAR sensor), and wherein the processor is further configured to: obtain obstacle information based on a sensing signal obtained by the LiDAR sensor (par. 42, “The sensing unit 130 may include at least one sensor for sensing at least one of information in the master robot 100, environmental information around the master robot 100, and user information”), and change a position of the communication interface based on the obstacle information and the position information of the external robot (par. 32, “the robot cleaner 100 may include various sensors (e.g., an obstacle sensor 131) to detect a collision during movement”—the communication interface is moved along with the robot).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Lee further teaches the communication interface is configured to communicate according to a short range communication method comprising Bluetooth communication (par. 39, “the communication unit 110 may include a short range communication module. Here, the short range communication module is for short range communication and may perform short range communication by using at least one of Bluetooth™, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), Infrared Data Association (IrDA), Ultra Wideband (UWB), ZigBee, Near Field Communication (NFC), Wireless-Fidelity (Wi-Fi), Wi-Fi Direct, and Wireless Universal Serial Bus (Wireless USB) technologies”),
Lee fails to teach the sensor comprises at least one of an infrared sensor or an ultra wide band (UWB) sensor. Lee does teach that the communication unit can include an infrared sensor or an ultra wide band (UWB) sensor (par. 39), but does not explicitly teach that the infrared sensor or an ultra wide band (UWB) sensor is used to obtain distance information.
Kwak teaches the sensor comprises at least one of an infrared sensor or an ultra wide band (UWB) sensor (column 2 line 60, “In an embodiment disclosed herein, the transmitting optical sensor and the receiving optical sensor may be infrared (IR) sensors, and the first module and the second modules transmitting and receiving the UWB signal may be UWB modules”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace Lee’s sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
Regarding claim 12, Lee teaches a method of controlling a robot (Fig. 1, master robot 100) that includes a communication interface (Fig. 2, communication unit 110) configured to wirelessly communicate with an external robot (par. 37, “the communication unit 110 among the components may include one or more wired or wireless communication modules that enable communication between the master robot 100 and the slave robot”), and a sensor configured to obtain distance data (Fig. 2, input unit 120 and sensing unit 130), the method comprising:
outputting a sensing signal for sensing a distance to the an external robot, and obtaining position information of the external robot (par. 51, “the control module 190 may control the input unit 120 or the sensing unit 130 to monitor movement of the slave robot 200”);
driving at least one of the robot or the external robot based on the position information (par. 50, “When moving the slave robot 200 in a predetermined space, the control module 190 may move the slave robot 200 on the basis of the position information on the slave robots 200 in the space map and the image information collected from the camera 121”);
identifying, based on an error in the communication with the external robot(par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”), a pose of the external robot based on a type of the at least one (par. 51, “the control module 190 may control the input unit 120 or the sensing unit 130 to monitor movement of the slave robot 200”; par. 48, “The control module 190 may receive identification information or shape information on the slave robot 200 from the slave robot 200 through the communication unit 110 and apply the information onto the space map”);
identifying a target position of the robot based on the pose of the external robot and map data wherein the target position is a position from which a visibility to the external robot is secured; and moving the robot to the target position (par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”).
Lee fails to teach obtaining position information of the external robot based on a time at which at least one echo signal is received from the external robot; and identifying, based on an error in the communication with the external robot through the communication interface, a pose of the external robot based on a type of the at least one echo signal received from the external robot. Lee instead that the sensor is a camera or image input unit (column 4 line 42), which could not be considered an “echo signal”.
However, Kwak teaches obtaining position information of the external robot (Fig. 5C, second autonomous mobile robot 100b) based on a time at which at least one echo signal is received from the external robot (column 21 line 22, “The second signal may include delay time (t_reply) information which is calculated based on a time at which the first mobile robot 100a has received the first signal and a time at which the first mobile terminal 100a has output the second signal”; see column 21 lines 9-26);
and identifying, based on an error in communication through the communication interface with the external robot (column 20 line 4, “On the other hand, when the IR sensor is used, if an obstacle is present between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, the reception of the laser light is interrupted, and the relative positions of the first and second mobile robots cannot accurately be recognized”—Lee teaches the communication unit 110 may perform short range communication using infrared or ultra wideband (par. 39), so the error would occur through the communication interface), a pose of the external robot based on a type of the at least one echo signal received from the external robot (column 20 line 9, “To solve this problem, as illustrated in FIGS. 6A and 6B, the present invention can measure the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot by using UWB modules instead of the transmitting/receiving IR sensors”; column 22 line 34, “The present invention can calculate the relative positions (spatial coordinates) of the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b using the plurality of UWB anchors. The triangulation described in FIG. 6B will be equally/similarly applied to calculating the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot using three UWB anchors and one UWB tag”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace Lee’s sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 12. Lee further teaches the identifying the pose of the external robot comprises identifying, while communicating with the external robot, the pose of the external robot based on the type of at least one echo signal received from the external robot, and wherein the method further comprises changing the pose of the external robot based on the pose of the external robot and the map data (par. 50, “When moving the slave robot 200 in a predetermined space, the control module 190 may move the slave robot 200 on the basis of the position information on the slave robots 200 in the space map and the image information collected from the camera 121”).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 12. Lee fails to teach the identifying the pose of the external robot comprises: identifying, based on the error occurring in the communication with the external robot through a communication interface, positions of a plurality of sensors, which output a plurality of echo signals from among the plurality of sensors disposed in the external robot, based on types of the plurality of echo signals received from the external robot, and identifying the pose of the external robot based on the positions of the plurality of sensors.
However, Kwak teaches the identifying the pose of the external robot comprises:
identifying, based on an error occurring in communication with the external robot through a communication interface, positions of a plurality of sensors (Fig. 7A, UWB anchors 710b-1, 710b-2, and 710b-3), which output a plurality of echo signals from among the plurality of sensors disposed in the external robot, based on types of the plurality of echo signals received from the external robot,
and identifying the pose of the external robot based on the positions of the plurality of sensors (column 20 line 9, “To solve this problem, as illustrated in FIGS. 6A and 6B, the present invention can measure the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot by using UWB modules instead of the transmitting/receiving IR sensors”; column 22 line 34, “The present invention can calculate the relative positions (spatial coordinates) of the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b using the plurality of UWB anchors. The triangulation described in FIG. 6B will be equally/similarly applied to calculating the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot using three UWB anchors and one UWB tag”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace Lee’s sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 12. Lee further teaches identifying the target position of the robot comprises: identifying, based on pose information being received from the external robot through the communication interface, the target position of the robot based on the pose information, the pose of the external robot, and the map data (par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 12. Lee further teaches wherein the obtaining position information of the external robot comprises: obtaining the position information of the external robot based on a sensing signal obtained by a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensor (par. 42, sensing unit 130 can be a LiDAR sensor; par. 51, “When moving the slave robot 200 on the basis of the space map, the control module 190 may control the input unit 120 or the sensing unit 130 to monitor movement of the slave robot 200. Accordingly, it is possible to intuitively recognize the slave robot 200 by the master robot 100”)
Lee fails to teach obtaining the position information of the external robot based on the time at which the at least one echo signal is received from the external robot.
However, Kwak teaches obtaining the position information of the external robot based on the time at which the at least one echo signal is received from the external robot (column 21 line 22, “The second signal may include delay time (t_reply) information which is calculated based on a time at which the first mobile robot 100a has received the first signal and a time at which the first mobile terminal 100a has output the second signal”; see column 21 lines 9-26).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace Lee’s sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 12. Lee further teaches obtaining obstacle information based on a sensing signal obtained by a LiDAR sensor (par. 42, sensing unit 130 can be a LiDAR sensor; par. 42, “The sensing unit 130 may include at least one sensor for sensing at least one of information in the master robot 100, environmental information around the master robot 100, and user information”), and changing a position of the communication interface based on the obstacle information and the position information of the external robot (par. 32, “the robot cleaner 100 may include various sensors (e.g., an obstacle sensor 131) to detect a collision during movement”—the communication interface is moved along with the robot).
Claim(s) 3-4 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Lee in view of Kwak, and further in view of Connor (US 20170229023 A1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Both Lee and Kwak fail to teach the processor is further configured to transmit, based on the error occurrence in the communication through the communication interface being predicted based on the pose of the external robot and the stored map data, a control signal for changing the pose of the external robot to the external robot through the communication interface.
However, Connor teaches the processor is further configured to transmit, based on the error occurrence in the communication through the communication interface being predicted based on the pose of the external robot and the stored map data, a control signal for changing the pose of the external robot to the external robot through the communication interface (par. 26, "The communication nodes 102 can use information about their relative positioning with respect to the locations of obstacles in order to predict likely communication link obstructions for possible future states").
The combination of Lee in view of Kwak relates to a plurality of autonomous robot cleaning devices that have a master slave relationship. Lee and Kwak both teach losing line of sight causes a communication error (Lee par. 52, “par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”; Kwak column 20 line 4, “On the other hand, when the IR sensor is used, if an obstacle is present between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, the reception of the laser light is interrupted, and the relative positions of the first and second mobile robots cannot accurately be recognized”). Connor relates to a method of communication link accessibility aware navigation between communication nodes, in which one or more of the communication nodes can be an unmanned vehicle (abstract and par. 25). Connor seeks to solve the problem of impaired communication between mobile communication nodes due to losing clear line of sight for optical communication (par. 2). Therefore, both inventions relate to the known problem of losing line of sight between two autonomous mobile machines, which can cause a communication error.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Lee in view of Kwak to incorporate the teachings of Connor to add determining a likelihood of an error occurring in communication. Connor states, “Communication link accessibility between communication nodes may require a clear line of sight for optical or high-bandwidth communication. When one or more of the communication nodes are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), a reduction or loss in communications can impede decision-making and planning capabilities” (par. 2). Predicting a likelihood of communication errors allows for “[a] modification of the path plan can be cooperatively determined with the one or more communication nodes to maintain or restore the one or more communication links” (par. 7).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 3. Both Lee and Kwak fail to teach the processor is further configured to determine a likelihood of the error occurring in communication through the communication interface based on information on obstacles disposed in an area corresponding to a position of the external robot on the map data, the pose of the external robot, and a moving path of the external robot.
However, Connor teaches the processor is further configured to determine a likelihood of the error occurring in the communication through the communication interface based on information on obstacles disposed in an area corresponding to a position of the external robot on the map data, the pose of the external robot, and a moving path of the external robot (par. 26, "The communication nodes 102 can use information about their relative positioning with respect to the locations of obstacles in order to predict likely communication link obstructions for possible future states").
The combination of Lee in view of Kwak relates to a plurality of autonomous robot cleaning devices that have a master slave relationship. Lee and Kwak both teach losing line of sight causes a communication error (Lee par. 52, “par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”; Kwak column 20 line 4, “On the other hand, when the IR sensor is used, if an obstacle is present between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, the reception of the laser light is interrupted, and the relative positions of the first and second mobile robots cannot accurately be recognized”). Connor relates to a method of communication link accessibility aware navigation between communication nodes, in which one or more of the communication nodes can be an unmanned vehicle (abstract and par. 25). Connor seeks to solve the problem of impaired communication between mobile communication nodes due to losing clear line of sight for optical communication (par. 2). Therefore, both inventions relate to the known problem of losing line of sight between two autonomous mobile machines, which can cause a communication error.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Lee in view of Kwak to incorporate the teachings of Connor to add determining a likelihood of an error occurring in communication. Connor states, “Communication link accessibility between communication nodes may require a clear line of sight for optical or high-bandwidth communication. When one or more of the communication nodes are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), a reduction or loss in communications can impede decision-making and planning capabilities” (par. 2). Predicting a likelihood of communication errors allows for “[a] modification of the path plan can be cooperatively determined with the one or more communication nodes to maintain or restore the one or more communication links” (par. 7).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 12. Lee fails to teach changing, based on the error occurrence in the communication with the external robot through the communication interface being predicted, the pose of the external robot.
However, Connor teaches changing, based on the error occurrence in the communication with the external robot through the communication interface being predicted, the pose of the external robot (par. 26, "The communication nodes 102 can use information about their relative positioning with respect to the locations of obstacles in order to predict likely communication link obstructions for possible future states").
The combination of Lee in view of Kwak relates to a plurality of autonomous robot cleaning devices that have a master slave relationship. Lee and Kwak both teach losing line of sight causes a communication error (Lee par. 52, “par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”; Kwak column 20 line 4, “On the other hand, when the IR sensor is used, if an obstacle is present between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, the reception of the laser light is interrupted, and the relative positions of the first and second mobile robots cannot accurately be recognized”). Connor relates to a method of communication link accessibility aware navigation between communication nodes, in which one or more of the communication nodes can be an unmanned vehicle (abstract and par. 25). Connor seeks to solve the problem of impaired communication between mobile communication nodes due to losing clear line of sight for optical communication (par. 2). Therefore, both inventions relate to the known problem of losing line of sight between two autonomous mobile machines, which can cause a communication error.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Lee in view of Kwak to incorporate the teachings of Connor to add determining a likelihood of an error occurring in communication. Connor states, “Communication link accessibility between communication nodes may require a clear line of sight for optical or high-bandwidth communication. When one or more of the communication nodes are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), a reduction or loss in communications can impede decision-making and planning capabilities” (par. 2). Predicting a likelihood of communication errors allows for “[a] modification of the path plan can be cooperatively determined with the one or more communication nodes to maintain or restore the one or more communication links” (par. 7).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 14. Both Lee and Kwak fail to teach the changing the pose of the external robot comprises determining a likelihood of the error occurring in the communication based on information of obstacles disposed in an area corresponding to a position of the external robot on the map data, the pose of the external robot, and a moving path of the external robot.
However, Connor teaches the changing the pose of the external robot comprises determining a likelihood of the error occurring in the communication based on information of obstacles disposed in an area corresponding to a position of the external robot on the map data, the pose of the external robot, and a moving path of the external robot (par. 26, "The communication nodes 102 can use information about their relative positioning with respect to the locations of obstacles in order to predict likely communication link obstructions for possible future states").
The combination of Lee in view of Kwak relates to a plurality of autonomous robot cleaning devices that have a master slave relationship. Lee and Kwak both teach losing line of sight causes a communication error (Lee par. 52, “par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”; Kwak column 20 line 4, “On the other hand, when the IR sensor is used, if an obstacle is present between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, the reception of the laser light is interrupted, and the relative positions of the first and second mobile robots cannot accurately be recognized”). Connor relates to a method of communication link accessibility aware navigation between communication nodes, in which one or more of the communication nodes can be an unmanned vehicle (abstract and par. 25). Connor seeks to solve the problem of impaired communication between mobile communication nodes due to losing clear line of sight for optical communication (par. 2). Therefore, both inventions relate to the known problem of losing line of sight between two autonomous mobile machines, which can cause a communication error.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Lee in view of Kwak to incorporate the teachings of Connor to add determining a likelihood of an error occurring in communication. Connor states, “Communication link accessibility between communication nodes may require a clear line of sight for optical or high-bandwidth communication. When one or more of the communication nodes are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), a reduction or loss in communications can impede decision-making and planning capabilities” (par. 2). Predicting a likelihood of communication errors allows for “[a] modification of the path plan can be cooperatively determined with the one or more communication nodes to maintain or restore the one or more communication links” (par. 7).
Claim(s) 9 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Lee in view of Kwak, and further in view of Gu (US 20180192845 A1).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the robot of claim 1. Both Lee and Kwak fail to teach a storage space configured to accommodate the external robot, wherein the processor is further configured to: control, based on work by the external robot being identified as necessary, an output of the external robot from the storage space, plan, based on the work by the external robot being identified as completed, a moving path of the external robot based on the pose of the external robot, and control the operation state of the external robot to accommodate the external robot in the storage space based on the moving path.
However, Gu teaches a storage space configured to accommodate the external robot (par. 40, chamber 15 for holding at least one secondary robot 2), wherein the processor is further configured to:
control, based on work by the external robot being identified as necessary (par. 42, "Some of the first sensors are used to identify a target zone that the primary robot may not be able to enter by measuring its dimension (height, length, width, or depth) in comparison with those parameters of the primary robot so that a smaller-size secondary robot may be assigned"), an output of the external robot from the storage space (Fig. 9, secondary robot is released from the primary robot),
plan, based on the work by the external robot being identified as completed, a moving path of the external robot based on the pose of the external robot (par. 51, "the second cleaning task is considered to be at least partially finished and the second controller 20 will also generate a signal representing the third command and transmit the signal wirelessly via the second communication module 22 to the first communication module 12 and to the first controller 10. The third command requests to move the secondary robot 2 back to the chamber of the primary robot 1”—although in this case the secondary robot controls itself, if combined with the combination of Lee in view of Kwak, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to recognize the secondary robot could be controlled by the primary robot instead),
and control the operation state of the external robot to accommodate the external robot in the storage space based on the moving path (par. 51, “The third command requests to move the secondary robot 2 back to the chamber of the primary robot 1”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Lee in view of Kwak to incorporate the teachings of Gu so that places the robot can’t fit can still be cleaned (par. 45, “But for some unusual target zones (with relative low in height, narrow in width, or with special shapes) where the primary robot is unable to enter to perform the first cleaning task, the smaller secondary robot 2 can be used to perform a second cleaning task inside each of those unusual target zones”).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Lee in view of Kwak teaches the method of claim 12. Both Lee and Kwak fail to teach the method further comprises: controlling, based on work by the external robot being identified as necessary, an output of the external robot from a storage space, planning, based on the work by the external robot being identified as completed, a moving path of the external robot based on the pose of the external robot, and controlling an operation state of the external robot to accommodate the external robot in the storage space based on the moving path.
However, Gu teaches the method further comprises: controlling, based on work by the external robot being identified as necessary (par. 42, "Some of the first sensors are used to identify a target zone that the primary robot may not be able to enter by measuring its dimension (height, length, width, or depth) in comparison with those parameters of the primary robot so that a smaller-size secondary robot may be assigned"), an output of the external robot from a storage space (Fig. 9, secondary robot is released from the primary robot),
planning, based on the work by the external robot being identified as completed, a moving path of the external robot based on the pose of the external robot (par. 51, "the second cleaning task is considered to be at least partially finished and the second controller 20 will also generate a signal representing the third command and transmit the signal wirelessly via the second communication module 22 to the first communication module 12 and to the first controller 10. The third command requests to move the secondary robot 2 back to the chamber of the primary robot 1”—although in this case the secondary robot controls itself, if combined with the combination of Lee in view of Kwak, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to recognize the secondary robot could be controlled by the primary robot instead),
and controlling an operation state of the external robot to accommodate the external robot in the storage space based on the moving path (par. 51, “The third command requests to move the secondary robot 2 back to the chamber of the primary robot 1”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Lee in view of Kwak to incorporate the teachings of Gu so that places the robot can’t fit can still be cleaned (par. 45, “But for some unusual target zones (with relative low in height, narrow in width, or with special shapes) where the primary robot is unable to enter to perform the first cleaning task, the smaller secondary robot 2 can be used to perform a second cleaning task inside each of those unusual target zones”).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Gu in view of Lee and Kwak.
Regarding claim 11, Gu teaches a system comprising:
a first robot (Fig. 3, primary robot 1); and a second robot (secondary robot 2) which is accommodated in a storage space of the first robot (chamber 15), (Fig. 1, first communication module 12), and a sensor configured to obtain distance data (par. 63, “the first sensors 11 in the primary robot 1 are configured to sense the location of the secondary robot 2”), and wherein the first robot is configured to:
transmit a control signal for outputting the second robot from the storage space to the second robot through the communication interface (Fig. 9, secondary robot is released from the primary robot) based on work by the second robot being identified as necessary (par. 42, "Some of the first sensors are used to identify a target zone that the primary robot may not be able to enter by measuring its dimension (height, length, width, or depth) in comparison with those parameters of the primary robot so that a smaller-size secondary robot may be assigned"),
transmit, based on the work by the second robot being identified as completed, a control signal for accommodating the second robot in the storage space to the second robot through the communication interface (par. 51, "the second cleaning task is considered to be at least partially finished and the second controller 20 will also generate a signal representing the third command and transmit the signal wirelessly via the second communication module 22 to the first communication module 12 and to the first controller 10. The third command requests to move the secondary robot 2 back to the chamber of the primary robot 1”—although in this case the secondary robot controls itself, if combined with the combination of Lee in view of Kwak, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to recognize the secondary robot could be controlled by the primary robot instead),
control the sensor to output a sensing signal for sensing a distance to the second robot (par. 42, “Some first sensors are used to determine current location of the primary robot 1 and also used to determine current location of the secondary robot 2”),
Gu fails to teach the second robot comprises a plurality of sensors configured to output echo signals of different types by being disposed at different positions; identify, based on an error occurring in the communication with the second robot through the communication interface, the positions of the respective sensors, which output a plurality of echo signals from among the plurality of sensors disposed in the second robot, based on the types of the plurality of echo signals received by the sensor from the second robot, identify a pose of the second robot based on the positions of the plurality of sensors, identify a target position of the first robot based on the pose of the second robot and based on map data, wherein the target position is a position from which a visibility to the second robot is secured, and move to the target position to remove the error.
However, Lee teaches (par. 52, “If the slave robot 200 is out of the image-capturing range of the input unit 120, the control module 190 controls the mobile module 170 to allow the slave robot 200 to enter the image-capturing range of the input unit 120 so that the mobile module 170 may approach the slave robot 200”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teachings of Lee to add the primary robot will move to a better position if the secondary robot is out of range. This would obviously improve the accuracy of controlling the secondary robot.
The combination of Gu in view of Lee fails to teach the second robot comprises a plurality of sensors configured to output echo signals of different types by being disposed at different positions; identify, based on an error occurring in the communication with the second robot through the communication interface, the positions of the respective sensors, which output a plurality of echo signals from among the plurality of sensors disposed in the second robot, based on the types of the plurality of echo signals received by the sensor from the second robot, and identify a pose of the second robot based on the positions of the plurality of sensors.
However, Kwak teaches the second robot (Fig. 5C, second autonomous mobile robot 100b) comprises a plurality of sensors configured to output echo signals of different types by being disposed at different positions (column 21 line 22, “The second signal may include delay time (t_reply) information which is calculated based on a time at which the first mobile robot 100a has received the first signal and a time at which the first mobile terminal 100a has output the second signal”; see column 21 lines 9-26); identify, based on an error occurring in the communication with the second robot through the communication interface (column 20 line 4, “On the other hand, when the IR sensor is used, if an obstacle is present between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, the reception of the laser light is interrupted, and the relative positions of the first and second mobile robots cannot accurately be recognized”—Lee teaches the communication unit 110 may perform short range communication using infrared or ultra wideband (par. 39), so the error would occur through the communication interface), the positions of the respective sensors, which output a plurality of echo signals from among the plurality of sensors disposed in the second robot, based on the types of the plurality of echo signals received by the sensor from the second robot, and identify a pose of the second robot based on the positions of the plurality of sensors (column 20 line 9, “To solve this problem, as illustrated in FIGS. 6A and 6B, the present invention can measure the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot by using UWB modules instead of the transmitting/receiving IR sensors”; column 22 line 34, “The present invention can calculate the relative positions (spatial coordinates) of the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b using the plurality of UWB anchors. The triangulation described in FIG. 6B will be equally/similarly applied to calculating the relative positions of the first mobile robot and the second mobile robot using three UWB anchors and one UWB tag”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gu in view of Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwak to replace the sensors with Kwak’s. Kwak provides a method for communicating locations of the robot and external robot that can be done even when obstacles are between the two robots, thereby increasing accuracy (column 20 line 38, “Accordingly, even if an obstacle exists between the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b, if the first mobile robot 100a and the second mobile robot 100b exist within a specific space, they can transmit and receive the UWB signals. This may mean that accuracy is increased”).
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 MINATO LEE HORNER whose telephone number is (571)272-5425. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/M.L.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights