Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 12, 14-21, and 23-25 are pending in this application; wherein claims 12, 15, 19-20 are amended, and claims 24-25 are newly added on 36/29/2026.
Priority
3. This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent 11815895, filed on 3 Jan. 2023, which claims priority and the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent applications 63/304,621, filed 30 Jan. 2022, 63/310,120, filed 15 Feb. 2022, 63/411,156, filed 29 Sep. 2022 and 63/478,170, filed 2 Jan. 2023.
Response
4. Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive because cited arts already suggest claimed steps. Due to the above amendment (6/29/2026); the examiner withdraws prior rejections (3/24/2026) and providing additional grounds of rejections; new grounds of rejections on the same cited art are presented below.
Claim Rejections 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 LSC. 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 in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner m which the invention was made.
5. Claims 12, 14-21, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RODRIGUEZ (US 20170255198 A1), in view of Altman (US pub 2021/0116907), and in view of Colley et al (US 20210090694 A1 – hereafter “Colley’694”).
A. Per independent claim 12: Rodriguez and Altman teach an intelligent, multi-function robot having a unique ID number (see Rodriguez para. [0168]) capable of autonomous movement (i.e., a robot, an autonomous/unmanned vehicle, see Altman, para. [0095]), comprising:
- a local database (see Rodriguez para. [0254])
- a module/scripter configured to: download/upload between a server and a robot (see Rodriguez para. [0266], or see Altman, para. [0014], [0047]-[0048], [0085], and Figs.1-4), to a separated/unique ID number (see Rodriguez para. [0168]), a command/instruction/script (using a script editor is also suggested by Colley’694 para.[1687], and [1808]), and using/beginning/initiating dockers/containers thereby enabling functionality independent of a connection to the server (see Altman, para. [0047],-[0048], and Figs. 1-4, wherein the container comprises a controller and a functional feature/instruction for autonomous operation.
Altman suggests about” “establish a communication protocol between the controller and the feature necessary for autonomous operation of the robot” (e.g., related functions/objects have been required to be involved/activated/controlled – see Altman, the abstract, para. [0100], [0119]).
Rodriguez and Altman suggests about ”at least a functional feature is necessary for autonomous operation of the robot” (see Rodriguez, para. [0095] see Altman, para. [0018] and claim 2).
Rodriguez and Altman do not disclose about “controls the at least one functional feature on the robot during operation, enabling autonomous functionality independent of connectivity to the disclose a robot’s identification for downloading”; however, Colley suggests this limitation (see Colley, para. [1257]).
Rodriguez and Altman already suggest about independently activations and controlling a function (including an object/container during operation, (see Rodriguez , para. [0095], and see Altman, para. [0194]).
In addition, applicant claims that “including at least one of: face vectors derived from images of specific individuals associated with the user's operational environment, and map data representing the user's specific physical deployment environment; however, Rodriguez suggests that via a sensor (an onboard camera/radar)”the map may be updated, and wherein, during navigation, the map “may be “updated using input received by the sensor; this limitation of updating additional sensor readings of a special map is suggested by RODRIGUEZ para. [0290], [0292]).
It 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 to implement RODRIGUEZ with Altman, and with Colley’694 for downloading a script to a destination having a unique ID because this unique ID has been known as a code that distinguishes a single entity from others in a system to be used independently – this modification has been a predictable solution with a reasonable expectation of success.
C. Per dependent claim 15: RODRIGUEZ also teaches an intelligent, multi-function robot comprises at least one of: vision, mobility, speech and audio (e.g., “Computer Vision” see RODRIGUEZ para. [0031], [0098]).
D. Per dependent claim 16: RODRIGUEZ and Altman do not expressly disclose about using “a docker”; however, applicant admits “a virtual container” is “a docker” (see spec. para. [0062]), and Colley’694 discloses about “downloading” a model software to a docker container “such that the software may be run on any platform or operating system.” (see Colley’694, para. [1257], [2841]).
E. Per dependent claim 17: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 16 are incorporated.
Colley’694 also suggests about a router configured to communicate and download from the server a subset of user data to support a docker (see Colley’694 para. [1257]).
F. Per dependent claims 14, and 18: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 17 are incorporated.
RODRIGUEZ also teaches an intelligent, multi-function robot having a feature of initiation/sending a ping signal to the server to determine a connectivity with the server (e.g., for a higher risk maneuver - send a ping signal to a party to begin (or to check a “correct” destination) a connection/communication (see RODRIGUEZ para. [0073]).
G. Per dependent claim 19: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 12 are incorporated.
RODRIGUEZ’198 also suggests that user personalized data comprises user information comprising at least one of user profile information and face vectors for face recognition (see RODRIGUEZ’198 para. [0033], [0047], [0048]).
H. Per dependent claim 20: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 12 are incorporated.
Colley’694 also suggests that user personalized data comprises map information comprising at least one of maps, location names, or robot environment (see Colley’694 para. [0153], [0272], [0307], [0390], [0433]).
I. Per dependent claim 21: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 16 are incorporated.
Colley’694 also suggests a router configured to download from the server a subset of operational data to support the dockers downloading (see Colley’694 para. [1257]).
K. Per dependent claim 23: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 12 are incorporated.
RODRIGUEZ also suggests a feature wherein the at least one task comprises
taking orders from a customer (e.g., “may receive user commands” see RODRIGUEZ para. [0255]).
L. Per dependent claim 24: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 12 are incorporated.
Applicant claims a method using related information for a navigation (e.g., location names or a map); this is suggested by Colley’694 para. [0153], [0272], [0307], [0390], [0433]).
M. Per dependent claim 25: The rationales and references for a rejection of claim 24 are incorporated.
Applicant claims a method to receive an input, wherein during
navigation, the map may be updated using said input received by the sensor, and wherein, during navigation, the map “may be “updated using input received by the sensor; this limitation of updating additional sensor readings of a special map is suggested by RODRIGUEZ para. [0292]).
Conclusion
6. Claims 12, 14-21, and 23-25 are rejected. Applicant's amendment necessitated additional 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.
7. The attached prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Cuong H Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-6759 (email address is cuong.nguyen@uspto.gov). The examiner can normally be reached on M - F: 9:30AM- 5:30PM. 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. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BENDIDI RACHID can be reached on (571) 272-4896. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only, For more information about the PAIR system, see https//ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CUONG H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights