DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
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 .
This is a Final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-8 and 10-18 are currently pending and are addressed below.
Examiner notes that the fundamentals of the rejection are based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. Applicant is kindly invited to consider the reference as a whole. References are to be interpreted as by one of ordinary skill in the art rather than as by a novice. See MPEP 2141. Therefore, the relevant inquiry when interpreting a reference is not what the reference expressly discloses on its face but what the reference would teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and/or arguments with respect to the rejection of claims 1-8 and 10-18 under 35 USC 103 as set forth in the office action of 10/01/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground(s) of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 14 objected to because of the following informalities: claims 4 andrecites “a second surface medium” should be replaced with ---the second surface medium-- Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2, 5, 8, 10-12, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vicenti US2019/0258262 view of Kim et al. US2012/0125363
Further in view of Jun et al. US2021/0064055.
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 11, Vicenti discloses non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, having a computer program stored thereon; an electronic device comprising; and a cleaning method for an automatic cleaning device (see at least [¶ 04-05, 49-54, 64] and Fig. 1-5A-D), comprising:
providing the automatic cleaning device, the automatic cleaning device having a dual-region cleaning mode for cleaning of a first surface medium region and a second surface medium region (robot 100 is dual mode cleaning robot that cleans different floor surface type (hardwood area, carpeted/uncarpeted area, rug and tile area see at least [¶ 49-50, 66, 79 & 95] and Fig. 1-7),
after the automatic cleaning device enters the dual-region cleaning mode, determining whether the second surface medium region exists according to a stored map in the automatic cleaning device (the robot’s navigation system stores multiple maps of the environmental that identify variations in floor surface material, and robot determines the second surface material area based on stored map see at least claims 2-3 & 8, [¶ 62-64 & 80 & 83] and Fig. 1-7);
in response to that the second surface medium region exists, cleaning the second surface medium region (“the controller can direct the robot to an adjoining area having a different floor surface and begin the Area Cleaning routine 400 within the new area”, that means robot cleaner starts cleaning the area with second surface medium see at least [¶ 94] and Fig. 1-7);
after cleaning of the second surface medium region is completed, marking the second surface medium region as a cleaned region, determining whether a next second surface medium region exists, and cleaning the next second surface medium region in response to that the next second surface medium region exists, until cleaning of all second surface medium regions is completed (the controller can direct the robot to an adjoining area and begin the rea cleaning routine 400 within the new area. “In this manner, the robot 100 may clean a series of areas in a systematic fashion before proceeding to the next area. After all areas have been cleaned” that means once robot completed second area, starts cleaning next area 1 and area 2 and so on until finished all areas and “cleaning cycle is complete”/marked as cleaned area see at least [¶ 94] and Fig. 1-7);
controlling the automatic cleaning device to clean the first surface medium region (the robot cleaner cleans see at least [¶ 94] and Fig. 1-7).
Vicenti does not explicitly disclose marking the second surface as a cleaned region.
However, Kim is directed to robot cleaner. Kim discloses marking the second surface as a cleaned region (once the robot clean an area marked as cleaned see at least [¶ 108 & 111]). Therefore, from the teaching of Kim, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Vicenti to use the technique of marking the second surface as a cleaned region similar to that of the teaching of Kim in order the enhance the robot cleaner operation.
Vicenti does not explicitly disclose determining whether a next second surface medium region, which has a same surface type as the cleaned second surface region exists
However, Jun is directed to robot cleaner, Jun discloses determining whether a next second surface medium region, which has a same surface type as the cleaned second surface region exists (as shown in Fig. 6A where the determine second area 3
with same surface medium region as the cleaned surface area 2 see at least [¶ 72 & 77] and Fig. 5-6). Therefore, from the teaching of Jun, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Vicenti to use the technique of determining a next second surface medium region, which has a same surface type as the cleaned second surface region exists similar to that of the teaching of Jun in order the enhance the robot cleaner operation.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Vicenti discloses wherein determining whether the second surface medium region exists according to the stored map in the automatic cleaning device (see at least claims 2-3 & 8, [¶ 62-63]) comprises:
determining whether the stored map has the second surface medium region (the system classify and store map of surface floor material see at least [¶ 63-64]); and
in response to that the stored map has the second surface medium region, controlling the automatic cleaning device to enter a position of the second surface medium region recorded in the stored map, and detecting whether the second surface medium region exists (robot clean the area with second surface floor material and see at least [¶ 66, 94] and Fig. 1-7).
6. Regarding claims 5 and 15, Vicenti discloses wherein the method further comprises: in a process of cleaning the second surface medium region, in response to that the second surface medium region is a cross-block region, ignoring a block restriction, and controlling the automatic cleaning device to clean an entirety of the second surface medium region (the robot clean selected area with specific surface medium area and robot directed away from another area with different surface medium/cross-block region see at least [¶ 56-57], furthermore, Vicenti discloses “Upon completion of the Area Cleaning Routine, the controller may continue to operate the robot in a cleaning mode but allow the robot to move beyond a flooring edge to clean adjacent flooring surfaces. For example, the controller can direct the robot to an adjoining area begin the area cleaning routine 400 within the new area.” that means robot ignore the block restriction and begin cleaning new area with different surface medium/cross-block region see at least [¶ 94]).
7. Regarding claims 8 and 18, Vicenti discloses wherein cleaning the second surface medium region (see at least [¶ 94] and Fig. 1-7) comprises:
cleaning, in the second surface medium region, a boundary region of the second surface medium region (clean boundary region see at least [¶ 57, 66 & 79] Fig. 5A-B); and after cleaning of the boundary region is completed, cleaning remaining regions of the second surface medium region (robot clean rest of area as shown in Fig. 5Asee at least [¶ 79 & 94-95] Fig. 5A-B).
Claims 3-4 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vicenti in view of Kim and Jun and further in view of Jeong et al. US2020/0293060.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Vicenti, Kim and Jun in combination disclose limitation of claim 1 and 11 as discussed above, but Vicenti silent on, however, in the same field of endeavor, Jeong discloses wherein in response to that the second surface medium region is not detected, the second surface medium region is deleted from the stored map to update the stored map. (“when the floor material identified based on the signal received through the sensor 150 and the floor material of the subspace identified based on the map are different from each other according to the comparison result, the map may be updated”, that means second surface medium region is deleted from the stored map to update the stored map see at least [¶ 0115]. Therefore, from the teaching of Jeong, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Vicenti to use the technique of second surface medium region is not detected, the second surface medium region is deleted from the stored map to update the stored map similar to that of the teaching of Jeong in order the enhance the robot cleaner operation.
10. Regarding claims 4 and 14, Vicenti discloses the automatic cleaning device according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises:
in response to a second surface medium region which is not cleaned, being detected by the automatic cleaning device during a process of controlling the automatic cleaning device to clean the first surface medium region, (the robot cleaner includes multiple sensors that detects cleaned and not cleaned area (dirt sensors) and surface types, robot starts cleaning area carpet 502 as shown in Fig. 5A that means robot determines another surface area 502 is not clean, it well known in art while the robot cleaning one area at same time detecting dirt/debris/(not cleaned area) another/second area, furthermore, the robot divide large area into subdivisions (second sub-area and third-area and so on) in order to better clean the whole area see at least [¶ 94-95] Fig. 5A-B);
controlling the automatic cleaning device to clean the second surface medium region detected by the automatic cleaning device (the robot cleaner enter second surface that is not clean and starts cleaning see at least [¶ 049, 051, 54-55, 94-95] and Fig. 5A-B) after cleaning of all second surface medium regions is completed, controlling the automatic cleaning device to continue cleaning of the first surface medium region until cleaning of the first surface medium region is completed (Vicenti discloses robot detects second surface floor medium and the robot clean the e.g. carpeted area and them move and clean next area, so robot can move clean second surface floor medium area and then clean first surface floor medium area see at least [¶ 94-95] and Fig. 1-7).
Vicenti silent on, however, in the same field of endeavor, Jeong discloses storing the second surface medium region detected by the automatic cleaning device in the stored map (the system determines the subspace and their priorities and store this information stored map see at least [¶ 90-91 &115]. Therefore, from the teaching of Jeong, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Vicenti to use the technique of storing the second surface medium region which is not cleaned in the stored map similar to that of the teaching of Jeong in order the enhance the robot cleaner operation.
11. Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vicenti in view of Kim and Jun further in view of Yoo et al. US2011/0118928.
12. Regarding claims 6 and 16, Vicenti discloses wherein before the automatic cleaning device enters the dual-region cleaning mode (see at least [¶ 49-50, 66, 79 & 95] and Fig. 1-7), the method further comprises:
in response to that the automatic cleaning device detects the second surface medium region, ignoring the second surface medium region (furthermore, Vicenti discloses “Upon completion of the Area Cleaning Routine, the controller may continue to operate the robot in a cleaning mode but allow the robot to move beyond a flooring edge to clean adjacent flooring surfaces. For example, the controller can direct the robot to an adjoining area having a different floor surface and begin the Area Cleaning routine 400 within the new area.” that means robot ignores the second surface medium region see at least [¶ 94])
controlling the automatic cleaning device to enter the dual-region cleaning mode (“the controller can direct the robot to an adjoining area and begin the Area Cleaning routine 400 within the new area”, that means robot enter the dual-region cleaning mode see at least [¶ 94] and Fig. 1-7. )
Vicenti silent on, however, in the same field of endeavor, Yoo discloses controlling the automatic cleaning device to enter a wall-following cleaning mode (robot enters wall-following mode to clean area see at least [¶ 07, 46 & 67-75] and Fig. 1-6);
in response to that the automatic cleaning device detects the second surface medium region in a wall-following cleaning process, ignoring the second surface medium region, and controlling the automatic cleaning device to continue wall-following cleaning until the wall- following cleaning ends and the automatic cleaning device exits the wall-following cleaning mode (once enters the wall-following cleaning starts cleaning and move from room to room and ignoring the surface medium and when cleaning is finished the robot exit wall-following mode, the examiner interpret robot moving from different areas and rooms around house/facility with different floor surface medium by ignoring second surface medium, furthermore, as discussed above Vicenti discloses the robot ignores second surface medium see at least [¶ 07, 73, 76 & 108] and Fig. 1-6)
Therefore, from the teaching of Yoo, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Vicenti to use the technique of controlling the robot to enter a wall-following cleaning mode and ignoring the second surface medium region, and controlling the automatic cleaning device to continue wall-following cleaning until the wall- following cleaning ends and the automatic cleaning device exits the wall-following cleaning mode similar to that of the teaching of Yoo in order the enhance the robot cleaner operation.
13. Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vicenti in view of Kim, Jun and Yoo further in view of Jeong.
14. Regarding claims 7 and 17, Vicenti, Kim, Jun and Yoo in combination disclose limitation of claims 6 and 16 as discussed above wherein, furthermore, Yoo discloses the wall-following cleaning process (see at least [¶ 07, 46 & 67-75] and Fig. 1-6) and Vicenti discloses the detected second surface medium region is marked, and whether the second surface medium region exists in the stored map is determined (the selected area/ second surface region is completed/marked and second surface region is stored in map see at least claims 2-3 & 8, [¶ 62-64, 80, 83 & 94] and Fig. 1-7, furthermore, Kim discloses the surface medium region is marked see at least[¶ 108 & 111]);
Vicenti silent on, however, in the same field of endeavor, Jeong discloses in response to that the second surface medium region does not exist in the stored map, the second surface medium region is stored in the stored map. (“when the floor material identified based on the signal received through the sensor 150 and the floor material of the subspace identified based on the map are different from each other according to the comparison result, the map may be updated”, that means second surface medium region is deleted from the stored map to update the stored map see at least [¶ 0115]. Therefore, from the teaching of Jeong, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Vicenti to use the technique of the second surface medium region does not exist in the stored map then update the stored map to include second surface medium similar to that of the teaching of Jeong in order the enhance the robot cleaner operation.
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 RACHID BENDIDI whose telephone number is (571)272-4896. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-4PM.
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, Faris Almatrahi can be reached at 313-446-4821. 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.
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights