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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to 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.
Status of Claims / Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 13 February 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 3-10, 13-14, 16-18, and 20 are currently pending and are being hereby examined herein.
Joint Inventors
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Response to Amendments / Remarks
Any reference to the prior office action refers to the final rejection dated 2 December 2025.
All objections from the prior office action are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 13 February 2026, with respect to the prior art rejections (rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the arguments.
Information Disclosure Statement
The a first information disclosure statement submitted on 24 February 2026 and a second information disclosure statement submitted on 21 May 2026 been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-7, 13-14, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the English translation of JP 2012-694 A (hereinafter, Yamaoka) in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0303964 (Hasegawa et al., hereinafter, Hasegawa).
Regarding Claim 1, Yamaoka discloses A robot (see at least English translation [0010]-[0012]), comprising:
a driver that drives the robot to move (see at least English translation [0019]: moving unit 5);
at least one processor (see at least English translation [0011] and [0020]: processing unit 3) configured to update, in accordance with a category of an acquired external stimulus, an emotion parameter expressed by a position on a positioning map having at least two coordinate axes and expressing a pseudo-emotion, and execute action control corresponding to the emotion parameter (see at least FIG. 8A & English translation [0035] and [0041]-[0047]: the external stimulus are categorized by which sensor they came from (e.g., sensor 1, sensor 2, etc.); the emotion point is updated based on sensor information; FIG. 8A shows an emotion map with two coordinate axes; action instructions are associated with the emotion points); and
a memory (see at least English translation [0021]: recording unit 4) configured to store a first table in which an evaluation value is associated with each category of a plurality of categories of acquirable external stimuli and a second table in which a correction value is associated with each position on the positioning map (see at least FIG. 4, FIG. 7A, FIG. 7B, & English translation [0034]-[0035]: event potential table 12 (i.e., first table) includes sensor information (i.e., category of the external stimulus) and event potential information (i.e., evaluation value); robot potential table 13 (i.e., second table) contains the robot potential E(x) which, as shown in space 41 of FIG. 4, has correction values associated with each position), wherein:
the at least one processor is configured to update the emotion parameter by acquiring, from the first table, the evaluation value associated with the category of the acquired external stimulus and acquiring, from the second table, the correction value associated with a current position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map, and moving, based on the evaluation value acquired from the first table and the correction value acquired from the second table, the position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map (see at least English translation [0038]-[0039]: the robot potential E(x) and event potential S(x) are combined to determine how much to move the emotion point)
the correction value in the second table is defined such that, for positions of the emotion parameter within a predetermined region on the positioning map, the position of the emotion parameter is moved closer to a reference position on the positioning map (see at least FIG. 4 and FIG. 15: each square within space 41 is a predetermined region; the peaks/valleys are reference positions and pull/push the emotion parameter),
the action control comprises controlling the driver to drive the robot to perform a motion corresponding to the emotion parameter (see at least English translation [0018] and [0056]: “Next, when the destination of the emotion point is determined, action instruction information having information for expressing an emotion, which is previously associated with the next emotion point, is acquired from the recording unit, and the acquired action instruction information is output to a moving unit for making the robot express an emotion, a generating unit for generating sound, or the like. Furthermore, while the robot is operating, emotion points on the emotion space are periodically moved according to the gradient vectors, and the robot is made to express natural emotions based on the behavior instruction information mapped in association with the emotion points”; “the action instruction unit 11 obtains action instruction information associated with the position of the moved emotion point from the emotion map table 16 and outputs it to the moving unit 5 or the voice generating unit 6 or the like”), and
the at least one processor is configured to execute the action control in response to updating the emotion parameter (see at least English translation [0018] and [0056]: “Next, when the destination of the emotion point is determined, action instruction information having information for expressing an emotion, which is previously associated with the next emotion point, is acquired from the recording unit, and the acquired action instruction information is output to a moving unit for making the robot express an emotion, a generating unit for generating sound, or the like. Furthermore, while the robot is operating, emotion points on the emotion space are periodically moved according to the gradient vectors, and the robot is made to express natural emotions based on the behavior instruction information mapped in association with the emotion points”; “the action instruction unit 11 obtains action instruction information associated with the position of the moved emotion point from the emotion map table 16 and outputs it to the moving unit 5 or the voice generating unit 6 or the like”).
Yamaoka does not explicitly disclose in updating the emotion parameter, the at least one processor is further configured to move the position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map, based further on a past occurrence frequency of the category of the acquired external stimulus, such that a movement amount of the emotion parameter from the current position on the positioning map is greater as the occurrence frequency decreases, regardless of where the current position is located on the positioning map.
Hasegawa, in the same field of robots with simulated emotions, and therefore analogous art, teaches in updating the emotion parameter, the at least one processor is further configured to move the position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map, based further on a past occurrence frequency of the category of the acquired external stimulus, such that a movement amount of the emotion parameter from the current position on the positioning map is greater as the occurrence frequency decreases, regardless of where the current position is located on the positioning map (see at least [0057]-[0058], [0061], [0079], [0085], and [0110]-[0111]: “even if the same external stimulus is received, if many similar external stimuli have been received in the past, the input data distance becomes small, and the personality (emotion change data 124) can be controlled so as not to change much”; “in the present embodiment, the emotion change data 124, that is, the degree of emotion change is also changed by the relationship data 126 representing the degree of familiarity with an external stimulus. Therefore, the robot 200 can perform the movement taking into consideration how the user has interacted with the robot 200 in the past”; “the change amount acquisition unit 115 provisionally acquires the emotion change data 124 (emotion change parameter) to be added to or subtracted from the emotion data 121 (emotion parameter) in response to the external stimulus acquired in step S102 (step S103). For example, when it is detected by the touch sensor 211 on the head portion 204 that the head of the robot 200 is stroked as an external stimulus, the change amount acquisition unit 115 provisionally acquires DXP as the emotion change data 124 to be added to the X value of the emotion data 121”).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to combine the teachings of Yamaoka with the teachings of Hasegawa with the motivation of providing more responses to the same stimulus and making the robot response depend on past interactions (see at least Hasegawa [0079] and [0109]).
Regarding Claim 3, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1. Furthermore, Yamaoka further discloses wherein, the at least one processor is configured to move the position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map across a plurality of different regions, and the correction value in the second table is defined such that, as the position is moved across the plurality of different regions, the position of the emotion parameter is moved from the current position toward the reference position, and then toward a target position (see at least FIG. 15 & English translation [0079]: as shown in graph 158, there can be multiple peaks / valleys, one can be a reference position and then one can be a target position).
Regarding Claim 4, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1. Furthermore, Yamaoka further discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to move the position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map closer to the reference position as time passes until a next acquisition of a second external stimulus after the at least one processor updates the emotion parameter in accordance with the category of the acquired external stimulus (see at least English translation [0038]: “When no external stimulus is received, only the robot potential E(x) is recorded as the potential U(x)”).
Regarding Claim 6, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1. Furthermore, Yamaoka further discloses wherein the positioning map includes, as the at least two coordinate axes, a first coordinate axis for expressing a pseudo degree of relaxation, and a second coordinate axis for expressing a pseudo degree of activeness (see at least English translation [0015]: the axes are pleasant-unpleasant, awake-asleep (i.e., activeness), and receptive-alert (i.e., relaxation)).
Regarding Claim 7, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1. Furthermore, Yamaoka further discloses wherein, the at least one processor is further configured to update the emotion parameter by moving the position of the emotion parameter on the positing map based further on a fluctuation component using a random number (see at least FIG. 10C & English translation [0053]-[0055]: randomly moving the emotion point is described and shown).
Regarding Claim 13, most limitations are similar to limitations already addressed in the rejection of Claim 1, and Claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as Claim 1. Furthermore, Yamaoka discloses A robot control method for controlling a robot comprising a driver that drivers the robot to move, the method being executed by at least one processor, the robot control method (see at least English translation [0011] and [0018]-[0019]: a method for making a robot express emotions via movement is described).
Regarding Claim 14, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 13. Furthermore, the limitations of Claim 14 are similar to limitations already addressed in the rejection of Claim 1, and Claim 14 is rejected for the same reasons as Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 16, this claim is substantially similar to Claim 3, and rejected for the same reasons as Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 17, most limitations are similar to limitations already addressed in the rejection of Claim 1, and Claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as Claim 1. Furthermore, Yamaoka discloses A non-transitory recording medium storing a program readable by a computer of a robot that acts in accordance with an emotion parameter expressing a pseudo-emotion, the robot comprising a driver that driver the robot to move (see at least English translation [0018]-[0021]: recording unit 4 is a memory that stores programs and there is moving unit 5).
Regarding Claim 18, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 17. Furthermore, the limitations of Claim 18 are similar to limitations already addressed in the rejection of Claim 1, and Claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 20, this claim is substantially similar to Claim 3, and rejected for the same reasons as Claim 3.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaoka in view of Hasegawa in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0131165 (hereinafter, Wu) and U.S. Pub. No. 2005/0216121 (Sawada et al., hereinafter, Sawada).
Regarding Claim 8, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 7. The Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination does not explicitly teach wherein the fluctuation component is expressed by a polar coordinate, a radius component of the fluctuation component is set using the random number, and an angle component of the fluctuation component is set so as to go around once in a predetermined period.
Wu, in the same field of simulating emotions, and therefore analogous art, teaches wherein the fluctuation component is expressed by a polar coordinate, a radius component of the fluctuation component is set using the random number (see at least [0077] and FIG. 3: “In the present exemplary embodiment, the emotion point S randomly produces an offset within an interval radius R so as to form a random vibratory interval moving along with the emotion point S, so that the emotional response of the robot won't be too stiff”).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to make the simple substitution of the known specific solution for random motion taught by Wu into the more-generically disclosed random variation of Yamaoka with the motivation of using a known solution with predictable results for emotional randomness that generates more personalized robot responses (see at least Wu [0056]).
Wu does not explicitly teach an angle component of the fluctuation component is set so as to go around once in a predetermined period
Sawada, in the same field of robots with emotion models, and therefore analogous art, teaches an angle component of the fluctuation component is set so as to go around once in a predetermined period (see at least [0081]-[0082] and equation (1): Biorhythm=a1 sin w1t+a2 sin w2t+a3 sin w3t, where t is time and ai, wi (I=1, 2, 3) are constants).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to combine the teachings of Yamaoka, Hasegawa, and Wu with Sawada by adding varying an emotion point by time based on biorhythm of Sawada with a random constant for radius taught by Wu with the motivation of adding some randomness to a arousal-based emotion so the arousal emotion differs day-to-day, but ensuring that arousal is not inappropriate for the time of day (see at least Sawada [0081]).
Claims 5 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaoka in view of Hasegawa in further view of U.S. Patent No. 11,260,536 (Kim et al., hereinafter, Kim).
Regarding Claim 5, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1. The Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination does not explicitly teach wherein the reference position is an origin of the positioning map. Kim, in the same field of robots with simulated emotions, and therefore analogous art, teaches wherein the reference position is an origin of the positioning map (see at least column 27 lines 1-5: “For example, the function 406 may have a decay or other time-based element that, in the absence of triggers, would change the emotion value 148. Continuing the example, if no triggers occur, the emotion value 148 may eventually revert to a neutral value such as 0”).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to use the emotion value of zero of Kim as one of the valleys/peaks in the Yamaoka with the motivation of decaying the emotion to a neutral (no emotion) location over time (see at least Kim column 27 lines 1-5).
Regarding Claim 9, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1. Yamaoka further discloses modifying the action of the robot based on personality (see at least English translation [0071]-[0077]: the robot has a growth which is expressed by changing the potential and allows the robot to express a rich range of emotions). The Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination does not explicitly teach (in combination with the other limitations of Claim 1) that the personality is a coefficient that further updates the emotion parameter: the at least one processor is further configured to update the emotion parameter by moving the position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map based further on a personality coefficient expressing a pseudo-personality of the robot.
Kim, in the same field of robots with simulated emotions, and therefore analogous art, teaches the at least one processor is further configured to update the emotion parameter by moving the position of the emotion parameter on the positioning map based further on a personality coefficient expressing a pseudo-personality of the robot (see at least column 24 lines 50-60: “A function 406 in the function library 146 may have different parameters, such as constants, which may be changed. For example, the parameters of the logistic function may be varied to change the “personality” of the interactive device 104”).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to combine the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination with variation based on personality of Kim to create further variation between different robots (see at least Kim column 24 lines 50-60).
Regarding Claim 10, the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1. The Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination does not explicitly teach (in combination with the other limitations of Claim 1) a preference coefficient that further updates the emotion parameter: wherein the at least one processor is further configured to update the emotion parameter by moving the position of the emotion parameter on the positing map based further on a preference coefficient expressing a pseudo-preference of the robot for the category of the acquired stimulus.
Kim, in the same field of robots with simulated emotions, and therefore analogous art, teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to update the emotion parameter by moving the position of the emotion parameter on the positing map based further on a preference coefficient expressing a pseudo-preference of the robot for the category of the acquired stimulus (see at least column 8 lines 45-60, column 24 lines 50-60, and FIG. 4: “A function library 146 may comprise one or more functions. A particular function may be associated with particular types of triggers”; “A function 406 in the function library 146 may have different parameters, such as constants, which may be changed. For example, the parameters of the logistic function may be varied to change the “personality” of the interactive device 104”).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to combine the Yamaoka and Hasegawa combination with varying parameters of Kim to create variation between different robots (see at least Kim column 24 lines 50-60).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDRA ROBYN MORFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-6109. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM ET.
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, Thomas Worden can be reached at (571) 272-4876. 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.
/A.R.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/JASON HOLLOWAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights