DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 10/30/2025. Claims 1-2 and 4-6 are pending. Claims 3 and 7-8 have been cancelled. Claims 1-2 and 4-6 have been amended. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection has been withdrawn in light of the terminal disclaimer. This action is made final, as necessitated by amendment.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that So (US 20170201617) does not teach amended claim 1 because So does not disclose a second planned route is generated “having a travel direction extending from a contact point detected at a predetermined time before an end of the swipe motion toward a last contact point of the plurality of contact points included in the swipe motion”, as recited in amended claim 1. Examiner respectfully disagrees, as So discloses traveling from a starting contact point as seen in Fig. 13a (a contact point detected at a predetermined time before an end of the swipe motion, the contact point being the first contact point) and towards an ending contact point as seen in Fig. 13b (the last contact point of the plurality of contact points included in the swipe motion). Regarding the added limitation of the second planned route being different from the first planned route, it is obvious that So would not stop taking user gesture inputs after the first gesture. A user would be able to gesture to move the robot on a first route, and then gesture again to move the robot on a second route. Additionally, So does disclose generating a new path if it detects a new touch input while the robot is moving (par. 196, “If a new touch is input while the cleaning robot 100 is moving, the moving distance and heading angle of the cleaning robot 100 may be newly determined for the new touch according to the same principle as in FIGS. 11C and 11D, and the cleaning robot 100 may move the newly determined moving distance at the determined angle”). Although So only discloses this for a touch input and not for a drag input, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to recognize that this feature could easily be added for drag inputs as well.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that So does not teach the feature “detect a swipe motion that includes a plurality of contact points on the display on which the first screen is displayed and includes contact during a time equal to or greater than a first threshold and excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold”, Examiner respectfully disagrees that this would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill. Although So does not explicitly teach a threshold to differentiate between a swipe and a non-swipe action, So responds differently when a swipe action is detected or a touch action is detected as shown in Fig. 11a-13b. The current claim language does not preclude also detecting a touch action, only that detecting a swipe motion excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold. So is able to detect both a swipe motion and a touch motion, so there is obviously some method that So uses to detect a swipe motion. Examiner believes that a time threshold would have been an obvious conclusion to one of ordinary skill in the art and that it would have been obvious that a dragging action could be differentiated from a tapping action based on the contact time. However, for clarity and to provide conclusive evidence, new prior art that more clearly teaches this feature has been set forth and detailed below under Claim Rejections.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over So (US 20170201617) in view of Yamanaka (JP 2010279312).
Regarding claim 1, So teaches a control method of a mobile cleaner (par. 88 Fig. 1, cleaning robot 100) using a terminal apparatus (par. 88 Fig. 1, mobile device 300), the terminal apparatus including a camera (par. 150 Fig. 6, capturing unit 331), a display (par. 144 Fig. 6, display 320) that displays a display screen including the mobile cleaner that autonomously travels, and a first control circuit (par. 157 Fig. 8, second controller 360), the mobile cleaner including a second control circuit (par. 136 Fig. 8, first controller 195), the control method comprising performing control to: cause the first control circuit to
(a1) acquire a first planned route of the mobile cleaner (par. 155, “The second storage 340 may store information about moving paths of the cleaning robot 100”),
(a2) display, on the display, a first screen having the first planned route superimposed on a camera image taken by the camera (see Fig. 11a-13b),
and (a3a) detects a swipe motion (see Fig. 13a) that includes a plurality of contact points on the display on which the first screen is displayed and includes contact during a time equal to or greater than a first threshold and excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold (par. 91, “If a touch for a single location is input from the user through the mobile device 300, the cleaning robot 100 may move to the location that corresponds to the single touch…If touching and dragging is input, the cleaning robot 100 may move along a path that corresponds to the touching and dragging”), and transmit positions of the plurality of contact points to the second control circuit (par. 140, “The first controller 195 may receive a control signal for the cleaning robot 100 from the mobile device 300 through the second communication unit 152…In this regard, the cleaning robot 100 may be moved to a location corresponding to a touch point input to the mobile device 300”);
cause the second control circuit to (a3b) generate, when generating a second planned route of the mobile cleaner that travels through the plurality of contact points received from the first control circuit, the second planned route having a travel direction extending from a contact point detected at a predetermined time before an end of the swipe motion toward a last contact point of the plurality of contact points included in the swipe motion (par. 76, “FIGS. 13A and 13B illustrate examples of designating a moving location of a cleaning robot and moving the cleaning robot to the moving location, through touching and dragging”), the second planned route being different from the first planned route (the user can continuously perform new gestures to control the robot and generate new routes).
So fails to explicitly teach detect a swipe motion that includes a plurality of contact points on the display on which the first screen is displayed and includes contact during a time equal to or greater than a first threshold and excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold. However, as shown in Fig. 11a-13b, So responds differently when a swipe action is detected or a touch action is detected. The current claim language does not preclude also detecting a touch action, only that detecting a swipe motion to excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold. So is able to detect both a swipe motion and a touch motion, so there is obviously some method that So uses to detect a swipe motion. While So does not explicitly teach including or excluding contact based on a time threshold, it would have been an obvious conclusion to one of ordinary skill in the art that a dragging action could be differentiated from a tapping action based on the contact time.
Yamanaka teaches detect a swipe motion that includes a plurality of contact points on the display on which the first screen is displayed and includes contact during a time equal to or greater than a first threshold and excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold (par. 26, “the flick operation can be detected as a pressing operation of pressing the touch panel 24 for a time less than the time threshold value and moving the touch panel 24 in a length range equal to or greater than the length threshold value, the start of the drag operation can be detected when the touch panel 24 is pressed for a time equal to or greater than the time threshold value”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified So to incorporate the teachings of Yamanaka in order to determine a swipe motion. It is obvious that a swipe motion would require a longer contact time than a touch or flick motion.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of So in view of Yamanaka teaches the control method of a mobile cleaner according to claim 1. So further teaches performing control to cause the second control circuit to generate, when the swipe motion is a straight motion on the screen, the second planned route having a travel direction extending from a position of the mobile cleaner toward a last contact point of the plurality of contact points included in the swipe motion (par. 90, “Moving to a location that corresponds to an input touch may include taking the shortest path to the location. It may also include taking a straight path or a curved path to the location”; see Fig. 13a and 13b), and generate, when the swipe motion is a curved motion on the screen, the second planned route curved to change an orientation of the mobile cleaner based on a line segment passing through each of the plurality of contact points included in the swipe motion (par. 90, “Moving to a location that corresponds to an input touch may include taking the shortest path to the location. It may also include taking a straight path or a curved path to the location”; see Fig. 13a and 13b).
Regarding claim 4, So teaches a cleaner control system comprising: a terminal apparatus (par. 88 Fig. 1, mobile device 300); and a mobile cleaner that is controlled with the terminal apparatus (par. 88 Fig. 1, cleaning robot 100), the terminal apparatus including a camera (par. 150 Fig. 6, capturing unit 331); a display (par. 144 Fig. 6, display 320) that displays a display screen including the mobile cleaner that autonomously travels; and a first control circuit (par. 157 Fig. 8, second controller 360), the mobile cleaner including a second control circuit (par. 136 Fig. 8, first controller 195), the first control circuit including:
(a1) a communication unit (par. 144 Fig. 8, communication unit 150) that acquires a first planned route of the mobile cleaner (par. 155, “The second storage 340 may store information about moving paths of the cleaning robot 100”);
(a2) a presentation unit (par. 159 Fig. 8, second display unit 320) that displays, on the display, a first screen having the first planned route superimposed on a camera image taken by the camera (see Fig. 11a-13b); and
(a3a) an input detection unit (par. 146 Fig. 8, second input unit 321) that detects a swipe motion (see Fig. 13a) that includes a plurality of contact points on the display on which the first screen is displayed and includes contact during a time equal to or greater than a first threshold and excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold (par. 91, “If a touch for a single location is input from the user through the mobile device 300, the cleaning robot 100 may move to the location that corresponds to the single touch…If touching and dragging is input, the cleaning robot 100 may move along a path that corresponds to the touching and dragging”), and transmit positions of the plurality of contact points to the second control circuit (par. 140, “The first controller 195 may receive a control signal for the cleaning robot 100 from the mobile device 300 through the second communication unit 152…In this regard, the cleaning robot 100 may be moved to a location corresponding to a touch point input to the mobile device 300”), the second control circuit controlling to:
(a3b) generate, when generating a second planned route of the mobile cleaner that travels through the plurality of contact points received from the first control circuit, the second planned route having a travel direction extending from a contact point detected a predetermined time before an end of the swipe motion toward a last contact point of the plurality of contact points included in the swipe motion (par. 76, “FIGS. 13A and 13B illustrate examples of designating a moving location of a cleaning robot and moving the cleaning robot to the moving location, through touching and dragging”), the second planned route being different form the first planned route (the user can continuously perform new gestures to control the robot and generate new routes).
So fails to explicitly teach detect a swipe motion that includes a plurality of contact points on the display on which the first screen is displayed and includes contact during a time equal to or greater than a first threshold and excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold. However, as shown in Fig. 11a-13b, So responds differently when a swipe action is detected or a touch action is detected. The current claim language does not preclude also detecting a touch action, only that detecting a swipe motion to excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold. So is able to detect both a swipe motion and a touch motion, so there is obviously some method that So uses to detect a swipe motion. While So does not explicitly teach including or excluding contact based on a time threshold, it would have been an obvious conclusion to one of ordinary skill in the art that a dragging action could be differentiated from a tapping action based on the contact time.
Yamanaka teaches detect a swipe motion that includes a plurality of contact points on the display on which the first screen is displayed and includes contact during a time equal to or greater than a first threshold and excludes contact during a time less than the first threshold (par. 26, “the flick operation can be detected as a pressing operation of pressing the touch panel 24 for a time less than the time threshold value and moving the touch panel 24 in a length range equal to or greater than the length threshold value, the start of the drag operation can be detected when the touch panel 24 is pressed for a time equal to or greater than the time threshold value”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified So to incorporate the teachings of Yamanaka in order to determine a swipe motion. It is obvious that a swipe motion would require a longer contact time than a touch or flick motion.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of So in view of Yamanaka teaches the control method according to claim 1. So further teaches the mobile cleaner further including: a cleaner main body having a suction port on a bottom surface (par. 101 Fig. 2, main unit 110); a suction unit disposed in the cleaner main body (par. 101 Fig. 3, “cleaning tool assemblies 170, 174 installed on the bottom of the main unit 110 for…sucking in swept or scattered dust”); and a drive unit that is disposed in the mobile cleaner main body and drives travel of the mobile cleaner (par. 134 Fig. 5, “The first driver 193 may drive the wheel motors 163, 164 of the moving assembly 160. Varying the speed of rotation of the left and right wheel motors 163, 164 may enable rotation of the main unit 110”), the control method comprising performing control to: cause the first control circuit to:
(b1) receive at least one cleaning state of a state before cleaning, a state during cleaning, and a state after cleaning from the second control circuit (par. 242 Fig. 23, “the process of providing and checking a cleaning status of the cleaning robot 100 may include sharing the cleaning status of the cleaning robot 100 between the cleaning robot 100 and the mobile device 300, and outputting the cleaning status of the cleaning robot 100 through the mobile device 100”);
(b2) receive, when the state before cleaning is received, a first planned route of the mobile cleaner from the second control circuit and display a first screen having the first planned route superimposed on the display (par. 155, “The second storage 340 may store information about moving paths of the cleaning robot 100”);
receive, when the state during cleaning is received, an amount of dust sucked by the suction unit from the second control circuit and display a third screen having a camera image taken by the camera and the amount of dust sucked by the suction unit on the display (par. 107, “an indication unit 122 for displaying the cleaning reservation information, a charging status, a dust collection level, a moving pattern, an operation mode, etc.”);
and receive, when the state after cleaning is received, an area where cleaning is completed by the mobile cleaner from the second control circuit and display a fourth screen having the camera image and the area where cleaning is completed by the mobile cleaner on the display (par. 58, “Displaying cleaning status of the cleaning robot on the display may include displaying a moving path, a cleaning region or a region in need of cleaning of the cleaning robot”; see Fig. 24).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of So in view of Yamanaka teaches the cleaner control system according to claim 4. So further teaches the mobile cleaner further including: a cleaner main body having a suction port on a bottom surface (par. 101 Fig. 2, main unit 110); a suction unit disposed in the cleaner main body (par. 101 Fig. 3, “cleaning tool assemblies 170, 174 installed on the bottom of the main unit 110 for…sucking in swept or scattered dust”); and a drive unit that is disposed in the cleaner main body and drives travel of the cleaner (par. 134 Fig. 5, “The first driver 193 may drive the wheel motors 163, 164 of the moving assembly 160. Varying the speed of rotation of the left and right wheel motors 163, 164 may enable rotation of the main unit 110”), the control system performing control to cause the first control circuit to:
(b1) receive at least one cleaning state of a state before cleaning, a state during cleaning, and a state after cleaning from the second control circuit (par. 242 Fig. 23, “the process of providing and checking a cleaning status of the cleaning robot 100 may include sharing the cleaning status of the cleaning robot 100 between the cleaning robot 100 and the mobile device 300, and outputting the cleaning status of the cleaning robot 100 through the mobile device 100”);
(b2) receive, when the state before cleaning is received, a first planned route of the cleaner from the second control circuit and display a first screen having the first planned route superimposed on the display (par. 155, “The second storage 340 may store information about moving paths of the cleaning robot 100”);
receive, when the state during cleaning is received, an amount of dust sucked by the suction unit from the second control circuit and display a third screen having a camera image taken by the camera and the amount of dust sucked by the suction unit on the display (par. 107, “an indication unit 122 for displaying the cleaning reservation information, a charging status, a dust collection level, a moving pattern, an operation mode, etc.”),
and receive, when the state after cleaning is received, an area where cleaning is completed by the mobile cleaner from the second control circuit and display a fourth screen having the camera image and the area where cleaning is completed by the mobile cleaner on the display (par. 58, “Displaying cleaning status of the cleaning robot on the display may include displaying a moving path, a cleaning region or a region in need of cleaning of the cleaning robot”; see Fig. 24).
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 MINATO LEE HORNER whose telephone number is (571)272-5425. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/M.L.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665