DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed 5/20/2026 has been entered.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 22 and 23 are 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. Claims 22 and 23 depend from a canceled claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10, 11, 13-15, 17-19, 24, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hamilton et al. (US 2022/0168893).
Regarding independent claim 1, Hamilton discloses a method executable by an autonomous mobile robot (AMR), the method comprising: training the AMR to auto-navigate to a zone where at least one task is to be performed, the zone defining a region as an open area without defined internal locations (see at least paras. 0004, 0046 and 0134); the AMR auto-navigating to the zone and, using one or more sensors, determining a presence of an object at a location within the zone (see at least para. 0075); and if the AMR is tasked with picking a load, removing the object from the location; or if the AMR is tasked with dropping a load, dropping the load at a position proximate to the object (see at least paras. 0135-0139).
Regarding dependent claims 2-6, 10, 11, 13-15, and 17-19, 24 and 25, Hamilton discloses using a set of object of interest sensors to locate the object within the zone, wherein the set of object of interest sensors includes one or more of two dimensional (2D) LiDAR sensors and/or three dimensional (3D) LiDAR sensors (730, 732); using a set of payload presence sensors to determine if the AMR is carrying a load, wherein the set of payload sensors includes one or more of 2D LiDAR sensors and/or physical paddle sensors (730, 732, and see at least para. 0139; determining the presence of the object includes determining the location of the object closest to the AMR and within the zone (see at least paras. 0046 and 0076); training the AMR to auto-navigate to the zone includes processing user inputs received via a user interface device to mark an entrance and/or exit of the zone in an electronic representation of an environment (see at least para. 0083); training the AMR further comprises defining the zone as having a near bound and a far bound that define space within which the load can be dropped or picked (see at least paras. 0091 and 0134); dropping the load includes determining the position to be at a separation distance from the object (see at least para. 0131, “aligns the robot with a side of the container”). using reverse obstruction sensing of the AMR to set a stop distance that maintains the separation distance between the object and the load when dropped at the position (see at least para. 0131, “aligns the robot with a side of the container”); the object is a previously dropped load or a structural element comprising a wall, a column, a table, or a shelving rack (see at least para. 0048); picking the load includes picking the load as the object closest to the AMR within the zone (see at least para. 0076); adjusting sensing by the one or more sensor to remove that load from the zone (see at least para 0139); if the AMR reaches an end of the zone without sensing the object, the AMR aborting the task of picking the load (see at least paras 0141 and 0149); in response to the AMR using an object of interest classification sensor to perform sensing of the object in the zone, attempting to classify the object as an obstruction or a pickable load (see at least para. 0136); and if the AMR classifies the object as an obstruction, the AMR pausing or stopping until the obstruction clears (see at least paras. 0131 and 0143); a lane comprising a plurality of linearly arranged locations (see at least paras. 0134-0138); and training the AMR to navigate the zone by reversing direction to exit the zone after a drop task or a pick task (see at least para. 0139).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-32 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant appears to state that claim 1 is distinct from Hamilton because Hamilton does not disclose “determining [the] presence of an object at [the] location within the zone” as recited in claim 1. The examiner disagrees with the applicant. At least in paragraph 0075, Hamilton discloses “using one or more sensors, determining a presence of an object at a location with the zone” as recited in claim 1.
Additionally, the applicant appears to state that claim 1 is distinct from Hamilton because Hamilton does not disclose determining “the task location at runtime within an open, non-discretized zone based on real-time sensor detection of the object, i.e., dynamically deriving the pick or drop location within an area lacking predefined internal positions by detecting the object in situ using onboard sensor”. The examiner disagrees with the applicant. At least in paragraphs 0046, 0075, and 0134, Hamilton discloses determining “the task location at runtime within an open, non-discretized zone based on real-time sensor detection of the object, i.e., dynamically deriving the pick or drop location within an area lacking predefined internal positions by detecting the object in situ using onboard sensor”. Furthermore, the examiner notes that much of what the applicant is relying on in this statement is not clearly recited in the claim.
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 PATRICK HEWEY MACKEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6916. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9-5.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/PATRICK H MACKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights