DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted May 09, 2024, January 27, 2026, and February 25, 2026 are considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: On -- line 7 -- of claim 8, the phrase “control the refuse collection robot to navigate to the autonomously navigate to the location of the pickup zone” should read “control the refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to the location of the pickup zone” . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: On -- line 16 -- of claim 20, the phrase “navigate to the location of the pickup zone perform the refuse collection” should read “navigate to the location of the pickup zone to perform the refuse collection”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-5, 8-9, 11, 18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Naoko et al. (Japanese Patent Application No. 2020/087134).
Regarding claim 1, Naoko discloses a refuse collection system comprising (para. [0024]):
one or more memory devices storing instructions thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to (para. [0055]; Fig. 5, memory 260):
receive a request for refuse collection from a customer, the request including a desired time of the refuse collection (para. [0056]-[0057]; acquisition unit 220 acquires request information regarding a collection request for the target garbage T issued from the user U's terminal device 100; a collection time period is included in the collection request);
identify, based on the request, a location of a pickup zone associated with the customer (para. [0057]); and
control, based on the request, the refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to the location of the pickup zone at the desired time and perform the refuse collection (para. [0064], [0070]).
Regarding claim 2, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko further discloses the refuse collection robot, wherein the refuse collection robot includes (para. [0037]; Fig. 1, collection vehicle 300 has the ability to travel without requiring any driving operations):
a chassis (para. [0032]; Fig. 1);
a tractive element coupled to the chassis (para. [0039]; Fig. 1, wheels);
a motor coupled to the chassis and the tractive element and configured to drive the tractive element to propel the refuse collection robot (para. [0039], motor); and
a refuse container coupled to the chassis, the refuse container being configured to receive a volume of refuse from the customer during the refuse collection (para. [0043]; refuse container 380).
Regarding claim 3, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko further discloses wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to:
generate billing data based on the request, the billing data indicating an amount owed by the customer for completion of the refuse collection (para. [0085], [0093], garbage collection fee determined using image information added to the request).
Regarding claim 4, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 3. Naoko further discloses wherein instructions further cause the one or more processors to:
receive refuse amount data from a sensor, the refuse amount data indicating an amount of refuse deposited into the refuse collection robot during the refuse collection (para. [0085], image information is included in the request that is used to estimate weight of target waste); and
generate the billing data based on the refuse amount data (para. [0093], garbage collection fee is determined based on type and amount of garbage).
Regarding claim 5, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 3. Naoko further discloses wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to:
receive refuse type data from a sensor, the refuse type data indicating a type of refuse deposited into the refuse collection robot during the refuse collection (para. [0085], image information from camera (imaging sensor) is included in the request that is used to estimate weight of target waste); and
generate the billing data based on the refuse type data (para. [0093], garbage collection fee is determined based on type and amount of garbage).
Regarding claim 8, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko further discloses wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to:
transmit a notification to a user device associated with the customer, the notification including a projected cost of the refuse collection (para. [0090]; presentation of an amount to pay for services on the mobile device contemplates notification of projected cost for the refuse collection);
receive a communication from the user device indicating that the customer has accepted the projected cost (para. [0090]; payment of fee is considered as acceptance of projected cost); and
control the refuse collection robot to navigate to the autonomously navigate to the location of the pickup zone in response to receiving the communication indicating that the customer has accepted the projected cost (para. [0091]).
Regarding claim 9, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko further discloses a user device configured to generate the request for the refuse collection in response to a user input by the customer (para. [0026]; Fig. 1, user device 100).
Regarding claim 11, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko further discloses the request includes at least one of (a) refuse amount data indicating an amount of refuse to be collected or (b) refuse type data indicating a type of refuse to be collected (para. [0082], [0085]); and
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to select the refuse collection robot from a plurality of refuse collection robots that are available to perform the refuse collection based on the at least one of the refuse amount data or the refuse type data (para. [0078), selection of vehicle is determined by the type and volume of target garbage).
Regarding claim 18, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko further discloses the request includes a current location of the customer (para. [0082]), and
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to set the current location of the customer as the location of the pickup zone (para. [0082]).
Regarding claim 20, Naoko discloses a refuse collection system comprising: a user device configured to receive a request for a refuse collection, the request indicating that the refuse collection should be performed as soon as possible (para. [0024]);
a refuse collection robot including (para. [0037]; collection vehicle 300):
a chassis (para. [0032]; Fig. 1);
a tractive element coupled to the chassis (para. [0039]; Fig. 1 wheels);
a motor coupled to the chassis and the tractive element and configured to propel the refuse collection robot (para. [0039], motor); and
a refuse container coupled to the chassis, the refuse container being configured to receive a volume of refuse from a customer during the refuse collection (para. [0043]; refuse container 380); and
one or more memory devices storing instructions thereon, that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to (para. [0055]; Fig. 5, memory 260):
identify, based on the request, a location of a pickup zone associated with the customer (para. [0057]); and
control, based on the request, the refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to the location of the pickup zone perform the refuse collection (para. [0064], [0070]).
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.
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.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoko et al. (Japanese Patent Application No. 2020/087134) in view of Novak et al. (U.S. Application Publication No. 2013/0246207).
Regarding claim 6, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 3. However, Naoko does not disclose the one or more processors to:
identify a period of elevated demand for refuse collection events; and adjust the amount owed by the customer based on whether the desired time for refuse collection falls within the period of elevated demand.
Novak discloses a system where instructions cause the one or more processors to:
identify a period of elevated demand for a requested service (para. [0030], [0036]); and
adjust the amount owed by the customer based on whether the desired time for requested service falls within the period of elevated demand (para. [0030], [0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naoko and incorporate the teachings in Novak of identifying a period of elevated demand for a requested service, and adjust the amount owed by the customer based on whether the desired time for the requested service falls within the period of elevated demand to maximize profitability by capturing higher margins when the demand for refuse collection is strong and to encouraging customers to request services by reducing the price when demand for refuse collection service is low. One of ordinary skill in the art would have readily recognized that price adjustment for the various services disclosed in Novak (para. [0010], a delivery service, a babysitting service, an entertainment service, a moving service, a food service, or a taxi service) could be easily adapted to a refuse collection service.
Regarding claim 7, Naoko in view of Novak, discloses all the limitations of claim 6. Naoko further discloses the refuse collection robot is one of a plurality of refuse collection robots (para. [0024]), and wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to: determine a current status of each refuse collection robot of the plurality of refuse collection robots (para. [0062]; generating unit uses information about “vacant vehicles” during generation of a dispatch command). Novak further discloses what Naoko lacks, specifically adjusting the amount owed by the customer based on a quantity of the service providers that are available to perform a service at the desired time (para. [0030], [0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naoko and incorporate the teachings in Novak of adjusting the amount owed by the customer based on a quantity of the service providers that are available to perform a service at the desired time to balance capacity and maximize revenue by increasing prices during low resource availability periods and while lowering prices to incentivize usage when capacity is available. One of ordinary skill in the art would have readily recognized that price adjustment for the various services disclosed in Novak (para. [0010], a delivery service, a babysitting service, an entertainment service, a moving service, a food service, or a taxi service) could be easily adapted to a refuse collection service.
Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoko et al. (Japanese Patent Application No. 2020/087134) in view of McCobb et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10553198).
Regarding claim 10, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 9. Naoko does not disclose the user input is a voice command.
McCobb discloses a mobile virtual assistant where the user input is a voice command (col. 4, line 63 to col. 5, line 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the user terminal of Naoko and incorporate the teachings McCobb of using a user input is a voice command to improve convenience by providing hands-free communication capability and faster communication speeds.
Claims 12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoko et al. (Japanese Patent Application No. 2020/087134) in view of Lyman (U.S. Application Publication No. 2015/0307273).
Regarding claim 12, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko does not disclose
providing a prompt for the customer to request the refuse collection to a user device associated the customer, the prompt being provided in response to a determination that that the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection.
Lyman discloses providing a prompt for the customer to request the refuse collection to a user device associated the customer, the prompt being provided in response to a determination that that the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection (para. [0047], notification is sent to a device used by an occupant of the premises (e.g., mobile computing device); para. [0051], the occupant is notified by the waste management company a scheduled pickup and the occupant may confirm the scheduled pickup, cancel the scheduled pickup, request a different time/day for the scheduled pickup).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naoko and incorporate the teachings in Lyman of providing a prompt for the customer to request the refuse collection to a user device associated the customer, the prompt being provided in response to a determination that that the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection to provide a more responsive service by alerting the customer of a scheduled pickup due to the fullness of a trash receptacle and allow the customer to request a different time/day for the scheduled pickup (Lyman: para. [0042])
Regarding claim 16, Naoko in view of Lyman discloses all the limitations of claim 12. Lyman further discloses what Naoko lacks, specifically, receive sensor data indicating a fill level of a refuse container associated with the customer (para. [0038]; Detection module 205 may detect a volume of trash within the trash receptacle, the weight of the trash within the trash receptacle); and
determine that the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection in response to the fill level of the refuse container exceeding a threshold fill level (para. [0051]; At block 510, a pickup for the trash receptacle may be automatically scheduled upon determining that trash in the trash receptacle is within the predetermined range of the maximum capacity of the trash receptacle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naoko and incorporate the teachings in Lyman of receiving sensor data indicating a fill level of a refuse container associated with the customer, and determine that the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection in response to the fill level of the refuse container exceeding a threshold fill level to optimize waste collection routes and realize savings in man-hours, fuel costs, and machine-operation costs by only scheduling pickup for full trash receptacles instead of collecting the waste bases on a set schedule (Lyman: para [0025]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoko et al. (Japanese Patent Application No. 2020/087134) in view of Gwon (U.S. Application Publication No. 2022/0292979).
Regarding claim 17, Naoko discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Naoko further discloses receiving location data indicating a current location of the refuse collection robot from a sensor of the refuse collection robot (para. [0035]; collection vehicle 300 transmits collection vehicle position information relating to its own position to the waste collection management device 200 via the communication device).
Naoko does not disclose commanding a user device associated with the customer to generate a graphical user interface indicating the current location of the refuse collection robot while the refuse collection robot navigates to the location of the pickup zone.
Gwon discloses commanding a user device associated with the customer to generate a graphical user interface indicating the current location of the refuse collection robot while the refuse collection robot navigates to the location of the pickup zone (para. [0018]; While the hauler is on the road, the location of the vehicle can be automatically updated in the system in relation to the collection point and displayed in the Haulla app. In some embodiments, both the hauler and the waste generator can observe the hauler's progress toward the dumpster by using the Haulla app).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naoko and incorporate the teachings in Gwon of commanding a user device associated with the customer to generate a graphical user interface indicating the current location of the refuse collection robot while the refuse collection robot navigates to the location of the pickup zone to provide real-time service status information to the user and improve coordination between customer and robot during the refuse collection process.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoko et al. (Japanese Patent Application No. 2020/087134) in view of Ferri et al. (G. Ferri, A. Manzi, P. Salvini, B. Mazzolai, C. Laschi and P. Dario, "DustCart, an autonomous robot for door-to-door garbage collection: From DustBot project to the experimentation in the small town of Peccioli," 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Shanghai, China, 2011, pp. 655-660, doi: 10.1109/ICRA.2011.5980254).
Regarding claim 19, Naoko discloses a refuse collection method comprising: prompting, by a user device associated with a customer, the customer to request a refuse collection (para. [0066]);
receiving, by the user device, a request for refuse collection and a desired time for the refuse collection (para. [0067]);
controlling a refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to a pickup zone associated with the customer at the desired time (para. [0073]).
Naoko further discloses controlling the refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to a refuse depot (para. [0062]; The starting point is typically a garage or the like, and the destination is typically a landfill or the like).
Naoko does not disclose in response to an indication that the customer has placed a volume of refuse within the refuse collection robot, controlling the refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to a refuse depot.
Ferri discloses a robot for garbage disposal, the method including in response to an indication that the customer has placed a volume of refuse within the refuse collection robot, controlling the refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to a refuse depot (pg. 665; In a typical operational scenario, a user requests garbage removal by placing a call to the automated DustBot call center. A robot is then dispatched to the predefined user home address. The robot interacts with the user through a touchscreen and receives a garbage bag. Then, it moves to a discharging site where it deposits the bag in different locations based on the type of garbage the user chose on the touchscreen).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naoko and incorporate the teachings in Ferri where in response to an indication that the customer has placed a volume of refuse within the refuse collection robot, controlling the refuse collection robot to autonomously navigate to a refuse depot to improve the effectiveness of the refuse removal task by confirming that the user has completed the refuse deposition task.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoko et al. (Japanese Patent Application No. 2020/087134) in view of Lyman (U.S. Application Publication No. 2015/0307273), and in further view of Waitkus (U.S. Patent No. US7957937).
Regarding claim 13, Naoko in view of Lyman discloses all the limitations of claim 12. Naoko in view of Lyman does not disclose receiving historical data indicating timings of a plurality of past refuse collection events performed by the refuse collection system for the customer; and
determine, based on the historical data, whether the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection.
Waitkus discloses receiving historical data indicating timings of a plurality of past refuse collection events performed by the refuse collection system for the customer (col. 3, lines 13-25; the system accounts for the usage patterns of the waste unit); and
determine, based on the historical data, whether the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection (col. 2, lines 12-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naoko in view of Lyman and incorporate the teachings in Waitkus of disclose receiving historical data indicating timings of a plurality of past refuse collection events performed by the refuse collection system for the customer; and determining, based on the historical data, whether the customer is currently likely to desire the refuse collection to maximize profit by generating additional pick-up opportunities that might arise before any regular scheduled pickup, as well as improving customer satisfaction by avoiding unsightly overflown trash containers that would otherwise have resulted if the refuse was not collected before the regular schedule.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEMESGEN M. MARU whose telephone number is (571)272-0039. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached at (571)270-3415. 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.
/TEMESGEN M. MARU/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/JACOB S. SCOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655