DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-20 have been presented for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
PRIORITY
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority to provisional application 63/425,823 filed on 11/16/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/1/23 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Examiner has considered the IDS as to the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
5. Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is not directed to a statutory category of invention.
i) Claim 11 recites a “real time evaluator” and therefore the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it does not appear to recite a process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter. As such the claim is rejected. The Examiner will interpret the claimed “real time evaluator” as a machine and notes that claim 1 also recites a machine.
Appropriate correction is required.
All claims dependent upon a rejected base claim are rejected by virtue of their dependency.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
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 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.
6. Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13-14, 16-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, Mudan, et al. "Onsite quality check for installation of prefabricated wall panels using laser scanning." Buildings 11.9 (2021): 412 hereafter Wang in view of Aldosari, Mohammed, et al. "A mobile LiDAR for monitoring mechanically stabilized earth walls with textured precast concrete panels." Remote Sensing 12.2 (2020): 306, hereafter A.
Regarding Claim 1: The reference discloses A system for guiding installation of overclad panels on a building façade, the system comprising:
a machine vision subsystem configured to:
track motion of panel targets relative to (Wang. Figure 1, elements 3 and 4) and
output a tracking signal indicative of positions of the panel targets relative to the (Wang. Page 6, bottom paragraph, “laser scanning”)
a controller subsystem communicatively coupled with the machine vision subsystem and configured to: access, in a data source,
a digital twin of the (Wang. Figures 5 and 6)
a digital twin of the overclad panel that includes panel local coordinates of the panel targets, and (Wang. Figures 5 and 6)
an installation tolerance, (Wang. Figures 5 and 6 with horizontal and vertical tolerance)
receive the tracking signal from the machine vision subsystem, (Wang. Page 2, 2nd to last paragraph)
ascertain, using the (Wang. Figures 5 and 6 with horizontal and vertical tolerance)
determine a corrective motion of the panel relative to the (Wang. Figure 3, including bottom elements that denote the requirement for rectification)
a user interface subsystem communicatively coupled with the controller subsystem and configured to:
receive the corrective motion instructions, and (Wang. Figure 3, including bottom elements that denote the requirement for rectification. See also Table 8)
issue them to the panel installer. (Wang. Figure 3, including bottom elements that denote the requirement for rectification)
Wang does not explicitly recite a façade element.
However A recites a façade wall element. (A. Page 1 last paragraph to Page 2 first paragraph reciting façade on MSE walls)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the façade element of A with the scanning system of Wang in order take into account for “architectural and aesthetically pleasing finishes.” (A. Page 1 last paragraph to Page 2 first paragraph)
Regarding Claim 3: Wang discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the machine vision subsystem monitors live positions of the panel in six dimensions including X, Y, Z (Wang. Table 1, page 5 showing horizontal and vertical dimension).
Wang does not explicitly recite Z, roll, pitch, and yaw.
However A recites Z, roll, pitch, and yaw. (A. Page 6, first paragraph, “pitch/roll angles and 0.004° for the heading (yaw).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the additional dimensions in A for the dimensional position in Wang since “Installation quality check is a critical task in prefabricated construction, and currently mostly still carried out manually, which is slow and ineffective. To provide an efficient and practical quality check method to replace the current manual method, this paper elaborates on an approach for checking prefabricated wall panels using laser scanning.” (Wang. Abstract)
Regarding Claim 4: The reference discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface subsystem comprises a display module, and the corrective motion instructions are presented to the panel installer using the display module. (Wang. Page 17, 1st paragraph, “After the quality check of horizontal alignment and verticality, resulting data for the panels that need to be rectified are presented in Table 8. If one of the horizontal alignment check or vertical check fails, the panel needs to be rectified.”)
Regarding Claim 6: The reference discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the corrective motion instructions actionable by the installer of the panel include a (Wang. Page 17, 1st paragraph, “After the quality check of horizontal alignment and verticality, resulting data for the panels that need to be rectified are presented in Table 8. If one of the horizontal alignment check or vertical check fails, the panel needs to be rectified.”)
Wang and A do not explicitly recite a plurality of sequenced textual based instructions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the option of a plurality of instructions to rectify the alignment in Wang and A since the prior art is not explicitly limited to a single instruction to rectify the alignment and it would be obvious that multiple steps may be required to reach proper alignment.
Regarding Claim 7: The reference discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the façade targets are disposed adjacent to façade connectors, and the panel targets are disposed adjacent to panel connectors that interlock with the façade connectors when the panel is installed on the façade. (Wang. Figure 7 whereby the IL panels represent the claimed panels and the façade panels are represented by the EL panels and they are respectively interconnected, see EL2 and IL2. See also Figure 8 showing the interconnection in at least subpicture (f).)
Regarding Claim 10: The reference discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the panel targets are disposed adjacent to panel connectors that interlock with other panel connectors when the panels are installed adjacent to one another. (Wang. Figure 7 whereby the IL panels represent the claimed panels and the façade panels are represented by the EL panels and they are respectively interconnected, see EL2 and IL2. See also Figure 8 showing the interconnection in at least subpicture (f).)
Regarding Claim 11: The reference discloses A real-time evaluator for guiding installation of one or more panels relative to a building envelope, the real-time evaluator comprising: a digital twin manager device configured to receive a target digital twin, the target digital twin including a predetermined arrangement of a virtual representation of a building envelope component and a virtual representation of a panel component; an autonomous tracking system resectioned in accordance with the target digital twin, the autonomous tracking system configured to: track motion of panel targets of a panel equipped with the panel targets as the panel is being brought towards, and installed at, a predetermined installation location of the building envelope, and output a tracking signal indicative of positions of the panel targets; wherein the digital twin manager device is communicatively coupled with the autonomous tracking system and configured to: maintain a current digital twin of the panel based on the tracking signal, the current digital twin including a virtual presentation of a panel component; and determine in six dimensions, based on a comparison between the current digital twin and the target digital twin, the positional variances of the panel component in the current digital twin to the panel component in the target digital twin, determine a series of corrective motions of the panel relative to the building envelope to position the panel closer to the predetermined installation location, and issue sequential corrective motion instructions actionable by an installer of the panel; and a position assistance system communicatively coupled with the digital twin manager device and configured to: receive the corrective motion instructions, and issue them to the panel installer. (See rejection of claim 1 and 3)
Regarding Claim 13: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the autonomous tracking system monitors live positions of the panel in six dimensions including X, Y, Z, roll, pitch, and yaw. (See rejection of claim 3)
Regarding Claim 14: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the position assistance system comprises a display module, and the corrective motion instructions are presented to the panel installer using the display module. (See rejection of claim 4)
Regarding Claim 16: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the corrective motion instructions actionable by the installer of the panel include a plurality of sequenced textual based instructions to guide the panel installer in moving the panel to the predetermined location, and wherein each of the plurality of sequenced textual based instructions are limited to instructions to move the panel in one dimension. (See rejection of claim 6)
Regarding Claim 17: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the panel targets are disposed adjacent to panel connectors that interlock with the façade connectors when the panel is installed on the façade. (See rejection for claim 7)
Regarding Claim 20: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the panel targets are disposed adjacent to panel connectors that interlock with other panel connectors when the panels are installed adjacent to one another. (See rejection for claim 10)
7. Claim(s) 2, 8-9, 12, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, Mudan, et al. "Onsite quality check for installation of prefabricated wall panels using laser scanning." Buildings 11.9 (2021): 412 hereafter Wang in view of Aldosari, Mohammed, et al. "A mobile LiDAR for monitoring mechanically stabilized earth walls with textured precast concrete panels." Remote Sensing 12.2 (2020): 306, hereafter A in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20050225770, hereafter C.
Regarding Claim 2: Wang and A do not explicitly recite The system of claim 1, wherein the panel targets and façade targets each comprises one or more retroreflectors, and the machine vision subsystem comprises: a laser-beam source, a beam scanning module, and an imaging module.
However C recites The system of claim 1, wherein the panel targets and façade targets each comprises one or more retroreflectors, and the machine vision subsystem comprises: a laser-beam source, a beam scanning module, and an imaging module. (C. “[0028] FIG. 1 shows a detachable object 10 which comprises a combined laser source and detection system 12, a polarising beamsplitter 14 which splits a beam from the laser source 12 into a reference beam 16 and a measurement beam 20. The reference beam 16 is directed towards a retroreflector 18 and then back to the polarising beamsplitter 14 and the detector 12. The measurement beam 20 is incident on a vacuum compatible plane mirror 22 mounted on a movable stand 24 which is housed within a vacuum chamber 26 and is movable towards and away from the laser source (in the x direction). The measurement beam 20 enters and leaves the vacuum chamber 26 via an optical window 38. The detachable object 10 is retained on a wall of the vacuum chamber 26 via a kinematic mount 28.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the laser/retroreflector system of C with the panel system of Wang and A since “Laser scanning is a promising technology for quality check since it could collect high density geometry data of objects accurately and objectively[1,8–10]. Some studies have proposed using laser scanning technology for quality check on surface defects and flatness[11],dimensions[12,13],and rebarassessment [14]of PWPs.” (Wang. Page 2, 2nd paragraph)
Regarding Claim 8: Wang and A do not explicitly recite The system of claim 1, wherein the panel targets and the façade targets comprise mechanical clamp optical targets.
However C recites The system of claim 1, wherein the panel targets and the façade targets comprise mechanical clamp optical targets. (C. “[0028] FIG. 1 shows a detachable object 10 which comprises a combined laser source and detection system 12, a polarising beamsplitter 14 which splits a beam from the laser source 12 into a reference beam 16 and a measurement beam 20. The reference beam 16 is directed towards a retroreflector 18 and then back to the polarising beamsplitter 14 and the detector 12. The measurement beam 20 is incident on a vacuum compatible plane mirror 22 mounted on a movable stand 24 which is housed within a vacuum chamber 26 and is movable towards and away from the laser source (in the x direction). The measurement beam 20 enters and leaves the vacuum chamber 26 via an optical window 38. The detachable object 10 is retained on a wall of the vacuum chamber 26 via a kinematic mount 28.” See also, “[0044] It is not necessary to use two wedge prisms. For example, the mirror may be offset to the required beam direction in only one plane, in which case a single bean steerer may be used. The wedge prisms may be replaced by alternative optical elements or mechanical adjusters such as an adjustable clamp as is described in International Published Application WO00/57228.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the laser/retroreflector with clamp system of C with the panel system of Wang and A since “Laser scanning is a promising technology for quality check since it could collect high density geometry data of objects accurately and objectively[1,8–10]. Some studies have proposed using laser scanning technology for quality check on surface defects and flatness[11],dimensions[12,13],and rebarassessment [14]of PWPs.” (Wang. Page 2, 2nd paragraph)
Regarding Claim 9: Wang and A do not explicitly recite The system of claim 1, wherein the panel targets and the façade targets comprise vacuum fixture optical targets.
However C discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the panel targets and the façade targets comprise vacuum fixture optical targets. (C. “[0028] FIG. 1 shows a detachable object 10 which comprises a combined laser source and detection system 12, a polarising beamsplitter 14 which splits a beam from the laser source 12 into a reference beam 16 and a measurement beam 20. The reference beam 16 is directed towards a retroreflector 18 and then back to the polarising beamsplitter 14 and the detector 12. The measurement beam 20 is incident on a vacuum compatible plane mirror 22 mounted on a movable stand 24 which is housed within a vacuum chamber 26 and is movable towards and away from the laser source (in the x direction). The measurement beam 20 enters and leaves the vacuum chamber 26 via an optical window 38. The detachable object 10 is retained on a wall of the vacuum chamber 26 via a kinematic mount 28.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the laser/retroreflector system of C with the panel system of Wang and A since “Laser scanning is a promising technology for quality check since it could collect high density geometry data of objects accurately and objectively[1,8–10]. Some studies have proposed using laser scanning technology for quality check on surface defects and flatness[11],dimensions[12,13],and rebarassessment [14]of PWPs.” (Wang. Page 2, 2nd paragraph)
Regarding Claim 12: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the panel targets and building envelope targets each comprises one or more retroreflectors, and the autonomous tracking system comprises a total robotic station. (See rejection for claim 2)
Regarding Claim 18: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the panel targets comprise mechanical clamp optical targets. (See rejection for claim 8)
Regarding Claim 19: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the panel targets comprise vacuum fixture optical targets. (See rejection for claim 9)
8. Claim(s) 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, Mudan, et al. "Onsite quality check for installation of prefabricated wall panels using laser scanning." Buildings 11.9 (2021): 412 hereafter Wang in view of Aldosari, Mohammed, et al. "A mobile LiDAR for monitoring mechanically stabilized earth walls with textured precast concrete panels." Remote Sensing 12.2 (2020): 306, hereafter A in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190081706, hereafter N.
Regarding Claim 5: Wang and A do not explicitly recite The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface subsystem comprises one or more speakers, and the corrective motion instructions are presented to the panel installer using the speakers.
However N discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface subsystem comprises one or more speakers, and the corrective motion instructions are presented to the panel installer using the speakers. (N. “[0069] Audio module 635 can be included to provide indicators to a user-installer on the state or status of the component or apparatus as a whole. For example, audio module 635 can be used to indicate a non-adequate relative optical alignment and aid the relative alignment by guiding a user-installer to find a better relative-alignment of the components 630 and 650. Audio module 635 can include a speaker and produce one or more tones, sounds, or recorded music or instructions, including voice instructions, to guide an installer in relatively moving one or more of the components 630 and 650 towards a suitable relative alignment as needed.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the audio instruction of N for the panel system of Wang and A since it would allow for “guiding a user-installer to find a better relative-alignment of the components.” (N. [0069])
Regarding Claim 15: The reference discloses The real-time evaluator of claim 8, wherein the position assistance system comprises one or more speakers, and the corrective motion instructions are presented to the panel installer using the speakers. (See rejection for claim 5)
Conclusion
9. All Claims are rejected.
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
i) Priniotakis, Georgios, et al. "Smart textile for building and living." Autex Research Journal 22.4 (2022): 493-496.
ii) Pylarinos, Panagiotis. "Tilebot. development of a lightweight modular robotic system for on-site component installation and facade fabrication." (2018).
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Saif A. Alhija whose telephone number is (571) 272-8635. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 10:00-6:00.
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, Renee Chavez, can be reached at (571) 270-1104. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Informal or draft communication, please label PROPOSED or DRAFT, can be additionally sent to the Examiners fax phone number, (571) 273-8635.
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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
SAA
/SAIF A ALHIJA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186
