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 .
1. Claims 1-13 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
Claim 5 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 “maximum” in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “maximum” 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. Applicant has the ability to amend the claims during prosecution to ensure that the meaning of the language is clear and definite prior to issuance or provide a persuasive explanation (with evidence as necessary) that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not consider the claim language unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
3. 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.
3.1 Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kozlovsky et al. ( US 20200269712 A1).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Kozlovsky discloses vehicle capable of running in a factory for manufacture of the vehicle during a course of manufacture in the factory ([0003], [0007],[0039], [0041], [0043], the AGVs can be controlled to move throughout a facility such as a factory), the vehicle (AGVs 100) comprising:
a communication device having a communication function for remote control ([0027], [0041], the AGV controller 194 can be a control mechanism which has a processor and a radio frequency (RF) transmitter or transceiver which can communicate with the AGVs 100);
a secondary battery for running ([0026],[0036], The AGV 100 has a are powered by rechargeable batteries in the power pack 131; and each wheel which are powered by lithium-ion or other rechargeable batteries in the power pack); and
a driving controller ([0008], an AGV control system for controlling the movements of the plurality of AGVs), when the vehicle is judged to be fed using information about a manufacturing status in the factory, the driving controller implementing driving control over the vehicle using a control signal transmitted from a server in such a manner as to feed the secondary battery using a power feeder available for charging the secondary battery ([0004],[0008], [0027], [0028], [0041], [0043] The AGVs can operate autonomously and/or communicate with an AGV controller. The AGVs can be configured or controlled to move over the wireless energy transmitters so that the receiver coils are positioned over the transmitter coils. The wireless energy transmitters can be configured to emit electromagnetic power when the battery of the AGV that is over the energy transmitter needs to be charged. the AGV controller can identify the battery charge of the AGVs and turn on the wireless energy transmitters that the AGVs are over. Alternatively, the AGVs can emit signals indicating that the battery needs to be charged and the wireless energy transmitter(s) directly under an AGV can emit electromagnetic power).
Regarding claims 13, Kozlovsky discloses power feeder used in a factory for manufacture of a vehicle ([Abstract, An inductive wireless charging system for a plurality of automatic guided vehicles), the power feeder comprising: a feeding controller adjusting a feeding condition for a feed of the vehicle, the vehicle being capable of running in the factory during a course of manufacture in the factory (Abstract, [0004], [0008], The AGVs can be controlled to move throughout a facility such as a factory), the feed being implemented when the vehicle is judged to be fed using information about a manufacturing status in the factory ([0023], [0028], [0053]-[0058], The AGVs can have data transmitters which can transmit the battery charge information to an AGV controller which can control the operation of the AGVs based upon their battery charge information. For example, scheduling AGVs with full charges for high work load tasks and AGVs with lower charges for lower power tasks and recharging).
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.
4. 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.
4.1 Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozlovsky et al. (US 20200269712 A1) in view of Fukui (US 20150263541 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kozlovsky discloses a system used in a factory for manufacture of a vehicle ([0001], robotized manufacturing), comprising:
a remote controller (Fig. 8, AGV controller 194) remotely controlling running of the vehicle capable of running in the factory during a course of manufacture in the factory ([0003], [0007],[0039], [0041], [0043], he AGVs can be controlled to move throughout a facility such as a factory);
the vehicle including a communication device having a communication function for remote control ([0041], the AGV controller 194 can be a control mechanism which has a processor and a radio frequency (RF) transmitter or transceiver which can communicate with the AGVs 100) and a secondary battery for running ([0026],[0036], The AGV 100 has a are powered by rechargeable batteries in the power pack 131; and each wheel which are powered by lithium-ion or other rechargeable batteries in the power pack), and
power feeder available for charging the secondary battery (Abstract, [0007], [0028], [0043], An inductive wireless charging system for charging a plurality of automatic guided vehicles (AGVs) and wireless energy transmitter the power).
Kozlovsky fails to disclose a manufacturing status acquisition unit acquiring information about a manufacturing status in the factory; and a feeding judgment unit judging whether to feed the vehicle using the acquired information about the manufacturing status, wherein when the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed, the vehicle is fed using the power feeder.
However, Fukui discloses a manufacturing status acquisition unit acquiring information about a manufacturing status in the factory (Fig. 5, Fig. 6, [0023],[0035]-[0037], determined whether or not the power setting of the equipment-side control device 2 is set to the off-peak setting (OFF-PEAK ON); and
a feeding judgment unit judging whether to feed the vehicle using the acquired information about the manufacturing status ([0023], Fig. 5, Fig. 6, [0033]-[0038], determined whether or not the battery voltage exceeds or lower than the set charging needlessness threshold voltage VA),
wherein when the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed, the vehicle is fed using the power feeder ([0023], [0025], If it is determined the voltage is lower the charging operation is performed by connecting the automatic charger 3 to the battery LB of the automated guided vehicle 1).
Kozlovsky and Fukui are analogous art. They relate to battery charging.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify, charging systems of AGV, taught by Kozlovsky, incorporated a battery charging management system, taught by Fukui, in order to provide lower a cost of the automated guided vehicle and lower a cost of the entire assembly production line.
Regarding claims 2 and 7, Fukui discloses a state of charge acquisition unit acquiring a state of charge of the secondary battery (Abstract, [0017],[0031], [0033], [0036], a charge/discharge monitor 11 that monitors a condition of the battery LB); and wherein the feeding judgment unit judges whether to feed the vehicle using the acquired state of charge of the secondary battery further (Fig. 5-6, [0036], [0043],
Regarding claims 3 and 8, Fukui discloses the manufacturing status acquisition unit acquires a delay status with respect to a target manufacturing period in a post-step that is a destination of running of the vehicle as the information about the manufacturing status ([0053], [0055], determining the abnormal condition of the battery LB is lowered when the automated guided vehicle 1 travels in an area of the assembly station BS of the assembly production line, compared to a case where the vehicle travels in other areas of the assembly production line, it is possible to suppress an abnormal interruption of the automated guided vehicle 1 while the vehicle passes through the area of the assembly station BS), and
when delay from the target manufacturing period has occurred and the state of charge is lower than a target value defined in advance, the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed. ([0052], the battery charging management system comprises a charging control part 20 that performs the charging operation for the battery LB using the battery charger 3 when it is determined that a voltage of the battery LB of the automated guided vehicle 1 arriving at the charging station CS is lower than the charging needlessness threshold voltage set by the charging needlessness threshold voltage setting part 2).
Regarding claim 4, Kozlovsky discloses the power feeder is a non-contact power feeder provided in the factory (Abstract, [0023], [0054], an inductive wireless charging system for a plurality of automatic guided vehicles (AGVs) includes an AGV control system and wireless energy transmitter that are configured to emit electromagnetic power to the AGV), and
when the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed, feeding using the non-contact power feeder is started ([0023], the AGV controller can identify the battery charge of the AGVs and turn on the wireless energy transmitters that the AGVs are over, the AGVs can emit signals indicating that the battery needs to be charged and the wireless energy transmitter(s) directly under an AGV can emit electromagnetic power).
Regarding claim 5, Kozlovsky discloses the remote controller (Fig 8, the AGV controller 194.)) moves the vehicle to a location where power transfer efficiency of power received from the non-contact power feeder becomes maximum ([0006], The elevated wireless energy transmitter surface reduces the distance between the transmitter coils and the receiver coils of the AGVs which can improve the energy transmission efficiency).
([0030]-[0032], [0044], [0047], Fig. 3A-Fig. 7, Power transfer receivers may be disposed on or near the BEV battery and may be transported alongside the BEV battery as the BEV battery moves along an assembly line from station to station, The maximum vehicle battery charge is allowed during vehicle battery transport).
Regarding claim 6, Kozlovsky discloses a system used in a factory for manufacture of a vehicle ([0039], The AGVs 100 can be controlled to move to an assembly location where a robot 189 can connect the AGVs 100 to assemble the robotic transportation apparatus), comprising:
a remote controller remotely controlling running of the vehicle capable of running in the factory during a course of manufacture in the factory ([0003], [0007],[0039], [0041], [0043], he AGVs can be controlled to move throughout a facility such as a factory);
the vehicle including a communication device having a communication function for remote control ([0041], the AGV controller 194 can be a control mechanism which has a processor and a radio frequency (RF) transmitter or transceiver which can communicate with the AGVs 100) and a secondary battery for running ([0026],[0036], The AGV 100 has a are powered by rechargeable batteries in the power pack 131; and each wheel which are powered by lithium-ion or other rechargeable batteries in the power pack),
Kozlovsky fails disclose a manufacturing status acquisition unit acquiring information about a manufacturing status in the factory; and a feeding judgment unit judging whether to feed the vehicle using the acquired information about the manufacturing status, wherein when the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed, at least one of making a notification and moving the vehicle is implemented, wherein the making the notification is implemented by the feeding judgment unit for prompting feeding of the vehicle using a power feeder, and wherein the moving the vehicle is implemented by the remote controller and is to move to a location where the vehicle is feedable using the power feeder.
Fukui discloses a manufacturing status acquisition unit acquiring information about a manufacturing status in the factory (Fig. 5, Fig. 6, [0023],[0035]-[0037], determined whether or not the power setting of the equipment-side control device 2 is set to the off-peak setting (OFF-PEAK ON); and
a feeding judgment unit judging whether to feed the vehicle using the acquired information about the manufacturing status (Fig. 5, Fig. 6, [0023],[0035]-[0037], start charging, step S9 based on the battery voltage of the AGV lower that threshold step S8),
wherein when the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed, at least one of making a notification ([0055], and moving the vehicle is implemented (Abstract, Fig. 5-6, [0016], [0017], each automated guided vehicle 1 houses a battery LB formed from a secondary battery (e.g., lithium-ion secondary battery) and a charge/discharge monitor 11 that monitors a condition of the battery LB. The automated guided vehicle 1 travels by using the battery LB as a driving power source),
wherein the making the notification is implemented by the feeding judgment unit for prompting feeding of the vehicle using a power feeder (Fig. 5-6, [0029], [0031], [0035], the battery charging control routine of FIG. 5 is executed when the automated guided vehicle 1 arrives at the automatic charger 3 of the charging station CS), and
wherein the moving the vehicle is implemented by the remote controller and is to move to a location where the vehicle is feedable using the power feeder (Fig. 5-6, [0036], [0037], As the automated guided vehicle 1 travels on the travel route R and arrives at the charging station CS, it stops in a predetermined position with respect to the automatic charger 3).
Kozlovsky and Fukui are analogous art. They relate to battery charging.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify, charging systems of AGV, taught by Kozlovsky, incorporated a battery charging management system, taught by Fukui, in order to provide lower a cost of the automated guided vehicle and lower a cost of the entire assembly production line.
Regarding claim 9, Kozlovsky discloses a method of manufacturing a vehicle (AGV 100) comprising: a step of causing the vehicle to run in a factory by remote control during a course of manufacture in the factory ([0003], [0007],[0039], [0041], [0043], the AGVs controller 194 can be control the AGV to move throughout a facility such as a factory).
Kozlovsky fails to disclose a step of judging whether to feed the vehicle using information about a manufacturing status in the factory; and a step of bringing the vehicle to a state feedable using a power feeder when the vehicle is judged to be fed.
However, Fukui discloses a step of judging whether to feed the vehicle using information about a manufacturing status in the factory (Fig. 5, Fig. 6, [0023], [0033]-[0038], determined whether or not the battery voltage exceeds or lower than the set charging needlessness threshold voltage VA), and
a step of bringing the vehicle to a state feedable using a power feeder when the vehicle is judged to be fed ([0023], [0025], If it is determined the voltage is lower the charging operation is performed by connecting the automatic charger 3 to the battery LB of the automated guided vehicle 1).
Kozlovsky and Fukui are analogous art. They relate to battery charging.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify, charging systems of AGV, taught by Kozlovsky, incorporated a battery charging management system, taught by Fukui, in order to provide lower a cost of the automated guided vehicle and lower a cost of the entire assembly production line.
Regarding claim 10, Kozlovsky discloses a remote controller (Fig. 8, AGV controller 194) remotely controlling running of a vehicle capable of running in a factory for manufacture of the vehicle during a course of manufacture in the factory ([0003], [0007],[0039], [0041], [0043], the AGVs can be controlled to move throughout a facility such as a factory), the vehicle including a communication device having a communication function for remote control ([0041], the AGV controller 194 can be a control mechanism which has a processor and a radio frequency (RF) transmitter or transceiver which can communicate with the AGVs 100) and a secondary battery for running ([0026],[0036], The AGV 100 has a are powered by rechargeable batteries in the power pack 131, and each wheel which are powered by lithium-ion or other rechargeable batteries in the power pack), and
Kozlovsky fails to disclose a manufacturing status acquisition unit acquiring information about a manufacturing status in the factory; and a feeding judgment unit judging whether to feed the vehicle using the acquired information about the manufacturing status, wherein when the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed, the vehicle is fed using a power feeder available for charging the secondary battery.
However, Fukui discloses a manufacturing status acquisition unit acquiring information about a manufacturing status in the factory (Fig. 5, Fig. 6, [0023],[0035]-[0037], determined whether or not the power setting of the equipment-side control device 2 is set to the off-peak setting (OFF-PEAK ON); and
a feeding judgment unit judging whether to feed the vehicle using the acquired information about the manufacturing status ([0023], Fig. 5, Fig. 6, [0033]-[0038], determined whether or not the battery voltage exceeds or lower than the set charging needlessness threshold voltage VA),
wherein when the feeding judgment unit judges that the vehicle is to be fed, the vehicle is fed using a power feeder available for charging the secondary battery ([0023], [0025], If it is determined the voltage is lower the charging operation is performed by connecting the automatic charger 3 to the battery LB formed from a secondary battery (e.g., lithium-ion secondary battery) of the automated guided vehicle 1).
Kozlovsky and Fukui are analogous art. They relate to battery charging.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify, charging systems of AGV, taught by Kozlovsky, incorporated a battery charging management system, taught by Fukui, in order to provide lower a cost of the automated guided vehicle and lower a cost of the entire assembly production line.
Citation Pertinent prior art
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bell (US 20240160226 A1 ) discloses controlling conveyor vehicles of a conveying system which permits an energy-efficient and cost-efficient operation of said conveying system, it is proposed that the method comprises: Making available a plurality of conveyor vehicles of the conveying system.
Kazama et al. (US 2010/0201306 A1 ) discloses a feeder for feeding power to the processor so as to charge the secondary battery, wherein the processor includes: a determination part for determining whether or not the contained secondary battery needs to be charged; a battery detection part for detecting the type of the contained secondary battery when it is determined that the secondary battery needs to be charged; and a transmission part for transmitting, to the feeder, a feed instruction.
Taki et al. (US20080266051A1) discloses a remote-control method for remotely controlling the operation of equipment furnished in a vehicle in response to a remote-control request generated by a remote controller is provided.
Vavrick (US 2016/0048130 A1) discloses using a controller, the cart on a production operation path; automatically detecting a state-of-charge in an on-board battery pack; signaling to a remote station the state-of-charge; and when the state-of-charge is below a predetermined charge limit, the remote station automatically signaling the cart to automatically change the route from the production operation path to a low battery charge path and stop at a battery station.
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for allthat it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed wereinstead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1 009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck& Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed Kidest Worku whose telephone number is 571-272-3737. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ali Mohammad can be reached on 571-272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application information Retrieval IPAIRI system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PMR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAG system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217- 9197.
/KIDEST WORKU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights