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 .
Remarks
This final office action is a response to the reply received on 10/29/2025. Claims 1 and 3-21 are pending. Claim 2 has been canceled. Claims 19-21 have been newly added. Claims 1, 3-13, 15-16, and 18 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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 argument.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 10-11, 16, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20190077021 A1) in view of Florencio et. al. (US 20190248015 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hayashi discloses:
A robot operating system comprising: (See at least Figure 4 which illustrates the robot operating system)
processing circuitry configured to evaluate a condition of a care-receiving object person on a basis of measurement information measured by a sensor included in a nursing care robot; and (See at least ¶0191 via "…the response recognizing unit 228 of the server 200 recognizes a responsive action of a female user (S32). A responsive action is thought to indicate a state of mind of a female user with respect to a specific action of the robot 100…. A positive reaction may be an explicit action such as hugging, touching a specific place (the head or the tip of the nose) on the robot 100, or saying positive words such as “you're cute” or “thank you”, or may be an implicit action such as a smile. A negative reaction may also be an explicit action such as kicking, hitting, or saying negative words such as “go away”, or may be an implicit action such as displaying a strange expression, being unresponsive, or sighing.". Additionally see Processor 122)
cause the nursing care robot to gradually approach the care-receiving object person on a basis of a result of the evaluation while temporarily stopping at a plurality of approaching positions (See at least ¶0245 via "When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance), the action determining unit 140 may cause the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)… Also, at this time, the recognizing unit 156 may acquire a facial image of the user, and the expression recognizing unit 230 may confirm the expression of the user from the facial image…the movement determining unit 138 may cause the approach to the user to be continued when the user exhibits predetermined behavior allowing an approach…")
(See at least ¶0245 via "When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance), the action determining unit 140 may cause the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)" **Wherein the "first distance" in ¶0245 is the third distance closer to the care-receiving object person than the second distance, and the "second distance" in ¶0245 is the second distance)
(i) causing the nursing care robot to move to the (See at least ¶0245 via robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)" **Wherein a nursing care action is the robot watching the user closely in order to ensure the user becomes aware of the robot)
(ii) causing the nursing care robot to move from the (See at least ¶0245 via "robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point" **Wherein the action of watching is before the robot moves to the next position/distance Additionally ¶0245 via "… the movement determining unit 138 may cause the approach to the user to be continued when the user exhibits predetermined behavior allowing an approach" **Wherein the movement to the next position/distance is continued when the users reaction is evaluated and behavior enables the approach to continue.)
(iii) causing the nursing care robot to execute a second nursing care action, other than the movement to the second position, at the second position, (See at least ¶0245 via robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)" **Wherein the nursing care action is the robot watching the user closely in order to ensure the user becomes aware of the robot)
(iv) causing the nursing care robot to move from the second position to the third position only if the evaluation, performed after executing the second nursing care action at the second position, indicates a non-negative reaction from the care-receiving object person, and (See at least ¶0245 via robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point" **Wherein the action of watching is before the robot moves to the 'final approach point' which is described as the 'first distance' in ¶0245- but corresponds to the claim's third distance. Additionally ¶0245 via "… the movement determining unit 138 may cause the approach to the user to be continued when the user exhibits predetermined behavior allowing an approach" **Wherein the movement from the second to third position [or, the 'final approach point] is continued when the users reaction is evaluated and behavior enables the approach to continue.)
(v) causing the nursing care robot to execute a third nursing care action, other than the movement to the third position, at the third position, wherein the third nursing care action is different from at least one of action, and the third nursing care action includes an amount of contact with the care-receiving object person that is greater than an amount of contact with the care-receiving object person included in the at least one of (See at least ¶0245 via " When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance)" **Wherein the third nursing care action corresponds to the user touching the robot).
However, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the reason that the user is touching the robot in ¶0245. Nevertheless, Hayashi discloses that the user can make contact with the robot in ¶0132 via "When the robot 100 visually recognizes a user, and detects a touch (physical contact) from the user, it is determined that interest in the robot 100 has been shown by the user, and familiarity increases…Touching may also be detected by the body temperature of the user being detected by the temperature sensor. When the robot 100 detects a hug, familiarity may be considerably increased on the basis that strong affection toward the robot 100 has been shown." such that the physical contact can include actions such as hugging or measuring a body temperature--which are nursing care actions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Hayashi to indicate the reason or specific type of physical contact/touch at the distance in ¶0245 which is the nursing care action that takes place at the third position ['first distance' in ¶0245].
However, although Modified Hayashi discloses the concept of nursing care actions, the gradual approach with a plurality of stops, and the second and third positions; Modified Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the first position corresponding to a first distance.
Nevertheless, Florencio--who is directed towards adapting robot behavior upon human-interaction--discloses: the first position (See at least Claim 1 via " cause the processor to perform acts comprising: detecting, based upon a signal output by the sensor, that the robotic device is a first distance from a human in an environment of the robotic device; responsive to detecting that the robotic device is the first distance from the human, computing a probability that the human will interact with the robotic device when the robotic device is a second distance from the human in the environment of the robotic device, wherein the probability is computed based upon past")
(ii) causing the nursing care robot to move from the first position to the second position (See at least Claim 1 via "controlling the motor to cause the robotic device to be at the second distance from the human" as well as Claim 4 which explicitly discloses that there are a first, second, and third distance from the human: "computing a second probability that the human will interact with the robotic device when the robotic device is a third distance from the human, the third distance being different from the first distance and the second distance").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Modified Hayashi in view of Florencio's plurality of distances to determine interaction probability, to include another intermediate distance from the human, as both references disclose staged positioning and evaluation at a plurality of distances. Thus, adding another stop/position is applying a known technique that yields predictable results, and would provide safer, improved, and more considerate interaction(s) between the robot and human: "A human feels special attachment toward an existence that shows consideration toward him or her, and toward an existence that interacts with him or her with sincerity" [Hayashi ¶0009].
Regarding Claim 3, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses: wherein at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action includes communication with the care-receiving object person (See at least ¶0045 via "Also, a speaker is incorporated, and the robot 100 is also capable of simple speech." and ¶0245 which illustrates a nursing care action via "the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance). In this way, by adding an action that causes hesitation to be noticed in a series of actions that are executed continuously at a normal time, the robot 100 expresses an aspect of understanding a poor physical condition of a user, worrying, and showing consideration.").
However, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the communication being the specific nursing care action.
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to include communication/speech as a nursing care action because the robot of Hayashi is capable of speech (¶0045) and speaking is another way that would allow the user to be aware of the robot.
Regarding Claim 4, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 3.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses: wherein the communication with the care-receiving object person includes speech to the care-receiving object person (See at least ¶0045 via "Also, a speaker is incorporated, and the robot 100 is also capable of simple speech." and ¶0245 which illustrates a nursing care action via "the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance). In this way, by adding an action that causes hesitation to be noticed in a series of actions that are executed continuously at a normal time, the robot 100 expresses an aspect of understanding a poor physical condition of a user, worrying, and showing consideration.").
However, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the communication being the specific nursing care action.
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to include communication/speech as a nursing care action because the robot of Hayashi is capable of speech (¶0045) and speaking is another way that would allow the user to be aware of the robot.
Regarding Claim 10, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: store evaluation data indicating a result of the evaluation (See at least ¶0191 via "As heretofore described, responsive actions are classified into positive reactions and negative reactions. A positive reaction may be an explicit action such as hugging, touching a specific place (the head or the tip of the nose) on the robot 100, or saying positive words such as “you're cute” or “thank you”, or may be an implicit action such as a smile. A negative reaction may also be an explicit action such as kicking, hitting, or saying negative words such as “go away”, or may be an implicit action such as displaying a strange expression, being unresponsive, or sighing" as well as ¶0132 via "When the robot 100 visually recognizes a user, and detects a touch (physical contact) from the user, it is determined that interest in the robot 100 has been shown by the user, and familiarity increases" **Which illustrates that the familiarity is derived from the reaction and is updated overtime, thus stored)
generate, as the evaluation data, evaluation data indicating acceptability of the nursing care robot for the care-receiving object person on a basis of the measurement information measured by the sensor in a case where the nursing care robot is caused to execute at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action, and cause the nursing care robot to execute at least another of the first nursing care action the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action on a basis of the evaluation data indicating the acceptability (See at least ¶0245 via "When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance), the action determining unit 140 may cause the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)…recognizing unit 156 may acquire a facial image of the user, and the expression recognizing unit 230 may confirm the expression of the user from the facial image….movement determining unit 138 may cause the approach to the user to be continued when the user exhibits predetermined behavior allowing an approach.")
Regarding Claim 11, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to cause the nursing care robot to execute at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action based on humanitude as a standard on a basis of cognitive characteristics of the care-receiving object person and acceptability of the nursing care robot for the care-receiving object person (See at least ¶0245 via " When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance), the action determining unit 140 may cause the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance). In this way, by adding an action that causes hesitation to be noticed in a series of actions that are executed continuously at a normal time, the robot 100 expresses an aspect of understanding a poor physical condition of a user, worrying, and showing consideration…").
Regarding Claim 16, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: store individual operation parameters of the nursing care robot for the care-receiving object person that are set on a basis of information about acceptability of the nursing care robot for the care-receiving object person, and (See at least ¶0191 via "As heretofore described, responsive actions are classified into positive reactions and negative reactions. A positive reaction may be an explicit action such as hugging, touching a specific place (the head or the tip of the nose) on the robot 100, or saying positive words such as “you're cute” or “thank you”, or may be an implicit action such as a smile. A negative reaction may also be an explicit action such as kicking, hitting, or saying negative words such as “go away”, or may be an implicit action such as displaying a strange expression, being unresponsive, or sighing" as well as ¶0132 via "When the robot 100 visually recognizes a user, and detects a touch (physical contact) from the user, it is determined that interest in the robot 100 has been shown by the user, and familiarity increases" **Which illustrates that the familiarity is derived from the reaction and is updated overtime, thus stored. *Wherein the familiarity is an example of an operation parameter, the classification of positive/negative reactions is another example of an operation parameter)
cause the nursing care robot to execute at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action on a basis of the operation parameters of the nursing care robot (See at least ¶0245 via "When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance), the action determining unit 140 may cause the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)…recognizing unit 156 may acquire a facial image of the user, and the expression recognizing unit 230 may confirm the expression of the user from the facial image….movement determining unit 138 may cause the approach to the user to be continued when the user exhibits predetermined behavior allowing an approach.").
Regarding Claim 19, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses the second nursing care action: wherein the amount of contact included in (See at least ¶0245 via robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)" **Wherein the second nursing care action is the robot watching the user closely in order to ensure the user becomes aware of the robot and involves no contact--the user cannot be touched by the robot **Wherein the *third* (initial/first in ¶0245) distance comprises contact).
However, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the first nursing care action, and thus does not explicitly disclose the amount of contact being the same in the first and second nursing care actions.
Nevertheless, Florencio discloses the plurality of distances: the first (See at least Claim 4 via "…when the robotic device is a third distance from the human, the third distance being different from the first distance and the second distance")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of Florencio's plurality of distances to determine interaction probability, to include another intermediate non-contact distance from the human, as both references disclose staged positioning and evaluation at a plurality of distances. Thus, adding another stop/position is applying a known technique that yields predictable results, and would provide safer, improved, and more considerate interaction(s) between the robot and human: "A human feels special attachment toward an existence that shows consideration toward him or her, and toward an existence that interacts with him or her with sincerity" [Hayashi ¶0009]. Furthermore, since the third distance (the final approach point) in Hayashi is the position designated to be the final distance which the robot and user make contact, it is obvious to include an intermediate distance before the contact to further provide more considerate actions when approaching the human.
Regarding Claim 20, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses: wherein the amount of contact included in the at least one of the first nursing care action and the second nursing care action is zero (See at least ¶0245 via robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)" **Wherein at least the second nursing care action involves no contact--the user cannot be touched by the robot)
Regarding Claim 21, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 19.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses the second nursing care action: wherein the amount of contact included in (See at least ¶0245 via robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)" **Wherein the second nursing care action involves no contact--the user cannot be touched by the robot, and the third nursing care action does comprise contact).
However, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the first nursing care action, and thus does not explicitly disclose the amount of contact being zero in the first nursing care action.
Nevertheless, Florencio discloses the plurality of distances: the first (See at least Claim 4 via "…when the robotic device is a third distance from the human, the third distance being different from the first distance and the second distance")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of Florencio's plurality of distances to determine interaction probability, to include another intermediate zero-contact distance from the human, as both references disclose staged positioning and evaluation at a plurality of distances. Thus, adding another stop/position is applying a known technique that yields predictable results, and would provide safer, improved, and more considerate interaction(s) between the robot and human: "A human feels special attachment toward an existence that shows consideration toward him or her, and toward an existence that interacts with him or her with sincerity" [Hayashi ¶0009]. Furthermore, since the third distance (the final approach point) in Hayashi is the position designated to be the final distance which the robot and user make contact, it is obvious to include an intermediate distance before the contact to further provide more considerate actions when approaching the human.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20190077021 A1) and Florencio et. al. (US 20190248015 A1) in view of Asukai et. al. (US 20180081365 A1, corresponding to WO2016170808A1 in the IDS) and Vu et. al. (US 20070192910 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
However, although Florencio discloses "an angle at which the robotic device approaches the human" (See Claim 18), Modified Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the initial angle being from the front direction with respect to the care receiving object person.
Nevertheless, Asukai--who is directed towards controlling a mobile body with regard to human-robot interaction--discloses: approach angle of the nursing care robot from a front direction with respect to the care-receiving object person (See at least the top portion of Figure 7 which illustrates the robot approaching the target person from a front direction at an approach angle 1)
PNG
media_image1.png
305
511
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of disclosing the initial approach angle facing the front direction with respect to the care receiving object person, because when the robot approaches the person from a certain angle, it has a certain influence to the person (compared to other angles): "For example, even at the same distance, a robot gives a different psychological influence to a person depending on whether the robot is in front of, obliquely in front of, beside, or behind the communication partner." [Asukai ¶0008].
However, although Hayashi detects moving objects, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the obstacle or changing approach angle based on an obstacle.
Nevertheless, Vu--who is directed towards a companion robot--discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: determine presence or absence of an obstacle on a basis of the measurement information, and (See at least ¶0051 via "a laser based obstacle detector", and also ¶0058 via " The generating step includes detecting obstacles or receiving the map electronically from a resident")
change an approach (See at least ¶0058 via "The method may also include the steps of selecting the next location based on an arbitrary heading and an arbitrary distance for the mobile robot to travel, moving in the direction of the arbitrary heading, adjusting a direction of travel of the mobile robot to avoid an obstacle")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of Vu's obstacle detection and avoidance in order to increase the safety and mitigate collisions/potential damage to the robot, human, and environment by changing a direction and avoiding an obstacle: "Because the mobile robot 100 functions in a household environment, the issue of household safety may be addressed by any of a variety of features. Among these features, inter alia, are personal contact avoidance, obstacle avoidance (including the ability to detect and/or avoid objects that exist over a wide range of possible heights and positions relative to the robot 100), and damage avoidance-avoiding and/or mitigating damage to either the home, objects in the home (such as furniture, fixtures, and the like), or the robot itself, for example. In connection with these features, the robot preferably includes redundancy in detecting and/or avoiding obstacles" [Vu ¶0140].
Regarding Claim 7, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 5.
Furthermore, Asukai discloses the approach angle: wherein, (See at least Figure 7 which illustrates a maintained approach angle)
PNG
media_image1.png
305
511
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of disclosing a maintained approach angle with respect to the care receiving object person, because when the robot approaches the person from a certain angle, it has a certain influence to the person (compared to other angles): "For example, even at the same distance, a robot gives a different psychological influence to a person depending on whether the robot is in front of, obliquely in front of, beside, or behind the communication partner." [Asukai ¶0008].
However, Asukai does not explicitly disclose obstacle detection.
Nevertheless, Vu discloses: in a case where the obstacle is determined to be absent (See at least ¶0146 via "The robot can receive data from two or more sensors, integrate the sensor data to predict the likelihood of an obstacle being present in one of the protection zones, and modify its actions (for example, by reducing speed, changing the direction of travel, and/or lowering the head 16, inter alia) when the predicted likelihood of an obstacle being present exceeds a threshold." which illustrates that there is a case where an obstacle is detected, and therefore also when there is no obstacle).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to include Vu's obstacle detection in Modified Hayashi, in order to determine whether it is necessary to perform an evasive maneuver to avoid collision. And thus, if there is no obstacle detected, it would be obvious to continue on the planned trajectory (approach angle) to reach the destination sooner while mitigating unnecessary maneuvers (such as changing approach angle).
Claims 12-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20190077021 A1) and Florencio et. al. (US 20190248015 A1) in view of Vu et. al. (US 20070192910 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 1.
Furthermore, Modified Hayashi discloses: the nursing care robot and the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action (See at least Hayashi ¶0245/Figure 1 and Florencio Claims 1 and 4).
However, Hayashi and Florencio do not explicitly disclose the implementation schedule.
Nevertheless, Vu--who is directed towards a companion robot--discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: store data of an implementation schedule of a plurality of applications for causing the nursing care robot to execute at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action and (See at least ¶025 via "A schedule 50 stored in the robot's processor may be set by the resident or a remote operator or caregiver. For example, the resident may enter events as desired, either via a computer or personal digital assistant, or directly by utilizing the robot's interface abilities. Additionally, the resident may request that certain behaviors be performed immediately. Similarly, a robot schedule 50 also may be linked to a doctor's computer or personal digital assistant to record critical appointments, medicinal doses, etc. Additionally or alternatively, the schedule 50 may receive instructions from a pharmacist's office when a new medicine is prescribed, for example.")
cause the nursing care robot to execute the at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action by each of the applications in accordance with the implementation schedule (See at least ¶0242 via "For example, if the robot 10 is docked at a base or charging station 406 when its schedule determines that a regimen must be initiated, the robot 10 may proceed from room to room within the environment 400 while monitoring the robot's immediate environment for indications that the resident is present.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of the scheduling disclosed by Vu, in order to improve the robot's preparation for assisting a resident/user by utilizing a schedule to help determine the resident's daily routine revolving around different types of actions: "Additionally, or in alternative, the robot may record, interpret, or accept inputs describing the resident's daily routine or schedule, and may use the schedule to predict and move to an appropriate room ahead of the resident." [Vu ¶0259]. Additionally, the robot maintaining a schedule allows for the robot to ensure the resident maintains all repeating necessary tasks: " The robot maintains a schedule or schedules of health, hygiene, and or need-specific regimens, reminders, messages, and encouragement techniques for associated users." [Vu ¶0104].
Regarding Claim 13, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 12.
Furthermore, Vu discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: store, as setting data of the implementation schedule, setting information about selection of the application to be implemented in accordance with the implementation schedule, selection of the care-receiving object person to implement the application, and a time at which the application is to be implemented, the setting information being set on a basis of an instruction from an information terminal, and (See at least Figure 9B via "Caregiver Terminal", and Figure 11A which illustrates applications to be implemented (example: "first meds"), and an implementation time (example: 10:00am). Also see ¶0215 via "A schedule 50 stored in the robot's processor may be set by the resident or a remote operator or caregiver". Additionally, see ¶0216 via "As shown in the schedule 50 in FIG. 11A, a medication compliance routine 54 may be scheduled following a morning regimen 52, which may include the robot waking the resident, a pill-loading sequence, a stretching regimen, a vital signs check, etc." which indicates that schedule 50 is a schedule for the selected resident.)
PNG
media_image2.png
521
471
media_image2.png
Greyscale
after causing the nursing care robot to execute the at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action by each of the applications in accordance with the implementation schedule (See at least ¶0217 via "For example, the robot may provide the resident with reminders for social visits 56, or entertainment events 58 previously placed in its schedule 50. During the medication compliance routine 54, the robot may remind the resident of the purpose of the interaction, note the amount of medicine that must be taken, and request permission to proceed with the compliance routine. In the present example, the mobile robot may, depending on whether the robot includes a medicine dispenser, magazine, or carrier, (i) direct the resident to go to the room in which medication is kept, (ii) offer medication from an cup or cups borne by the robot, along with water, and/or (iii) open an appropriate portion of a pill dispenser, in order for the resident to retrieve and take the medication")
revise the setting data of the implementation schedule on a basis of a result of executing the at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action (See at least Figure 11C and ¶0219-¶0220 which explains that if the medication or regimen is refused, the time of the medication/regimen can be delayed ("snoozed") which is an example of the setting (time) being revised (delayed) based on the result of executing the action (refusing)).
PNG
media_image3.png
676
510
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of the scheduling disclosed by Vu, in order to improve the robot's assistance to the resident by utilizing a schedule to help determine the resident's daily routine revolving around different types of actions: "Additionally, or in alternative, the robot may record, interpret, or accept inputs describing the resident's daily routine or schedule, and may use the schedule to predict and move to an appropriate room ahead of the resident." [Vu ¶0259]. Additionally, the robot maintaining a schedule allows for the robot to ensure the resident maintains all repeating necessary tasks: " The robot maintains a schedule or schedules of health, hygiene, and or need-specific regimens, reminders, messages, and encouragement techniques for associated users." [Vu ¶0104].
Regarding Claim 14, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 13.
Furthermore, Vu discloses: wherein the information terminal receives setting of the implementation schedule from a staff member of a nursing facility (See at least Figure 9B via "Caregiver Terminal" and see ¶0215 via "A schedule 50 stored in the robot's processor may be set by the resident or a remote operator or caregiver….Similarly, a robot schedule 50 also may be linked to a doctor's computer or personal digital assistant to record critical appointments, medicinal doses, etc. Additionally or alternatively, the schedule 50 may receive instructions from a pharmacist's office when a new medicine is prescribed, for example").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of the caregiver provided scheduling disclosed by Vu, in order to ensure the given schedule allows the robot to ensure the resident maintains all necessary tasks: "The robot maintains a schedule or schedules of health, hygiene, and or need-specific regimens, reminders, messages, and encouragement techniques for associated users." [Vu ¶0104], and to allow the caregiver or staff member to provide necessary updates such as a new prescribed medication [Vu ¶0215].
Regarding Claim 15, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 14.
Furthermore, Vu discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to present the revised setting data of the implementation schedule to the information terminal to allow the staff member of the nursing facility to edit the setting data of the implementation schedule (See at least ¶0220 via "The snooze routine may be limited in recurrences for particular regimens deemed more important, but not critical, by the resident, caregiver, or robot (e.g., medication compliance, therapeutic compliance, etc.). For less critical regimens (e.g., social and entertainment events, morning wake-ups on days with no events scheduled, etc.) the snooze routine may time out entirely. The snooze routine may also be modifiable with a secondary reminder (e.g., when permitting a delay by, for example, 15 minutes, the robot may issue a reminder that the compliance with the regimen will be soon required), and then return to SC3. The snooze function SC9' may also be utilized when circumstances for compliance are unfavorable (e.g., the person is preparing a meal when a teleconference is scheduled, etc.). When a regimen compliance routine is interrupted or delayed by necessity and by the resident's control, it may be reinstated after a requested delay. Such delays may be managed by postponement rules that provide guidelines as to how many times and how long medication may be delayed or refused, and whether and how a caregiver is to be notified upon a delay or refusal").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of the caregiver provided scheduling disclosed by Vu, in order to ensure the given schedule allows the robot to ensure the resident maintains all necessary tasks: "The robot maintains a schedule or schedules of health, hygiene, and or need-specific regimens, reminders, messages, and encouragement techniques for associated users." [Vu ¶0104], and to allow the caregiver or staff member to modify the settings such as limiting the amount of times a regimen can be delayed [Vu ¶0220] in order to make sure the important tasks can be completed.
Regarding Claim 17, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 16.
However, although Hayashi discloses an example of operation parameters (See at least ¶0191 and ¶0132), Hayashi does not explicitly disclose operation parameters being received from a staff member.
Nevertheless, Vu discloses: wherein setting of the operation parameters is received from a staff member of a nursing facility through an information terminal (See at least Figure 9B via "Caregiver Terminal" and ¶0217 via " For example, the robot may be provided with an associated medication cache, carrier, magazine, or dispenser, and may also include with a water carrier or dispenser. When the compliance routine 54 is initiated by a time or other event trigger (for example, after a meal, upon direction from a remote caregiver, etc.), the robot may take the medication to the resident or bring the resident to the medication." Additionally ¶0220 via "The snooze routine may be limited in recurrences for particular regimens deemed more important, but not critical, by the resident, caregiver, or robot (e.g., medication compliance, therapeutic compliance, etc.)")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of Vu's operation parameters being received by a staff member in order to expand the types of operation parameters that can be considered as well as ensure that based on the acceptability (which corresponds to the familiarity in Hayashi) of the target person, the staff member/caregiver can ensure that all important tasks are completed. For example, the person may refuse to take medicine (and "snooze" the medicine time) and the operation parameter set by the caregiver (limit on number of snooze routines) ensures that the target person can be cared for properly. This concept would be obvious to apply to Hayashi's familiarity, because a staff member can recognize that a specific resident/person might tend to initiate a snooze routine for a specific regimen, or react in a specific way in certain situations- which is a pattern based on history and can be improved by implementing parameters to the robot to help it operate more efficiently while ensuring the resident is cared for properly (Such as, setting a snooze limit so the resident takes their medicine, or setting an interpersonal distance limit to not cause the person stress).
Regarding Claim 18, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 17.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, after causing the nursing care robot to execute the at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action, or the third nursing care action on the basis of the operation parameters of the nursing care robot revise the operation parameters of the nursing care robot on a basis of a result of executing the at least one of the first nursing care action, the second nursing care action or the third nursing care action, and (See at least ¶0245 via "When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance), the action determining unit 140 may cause the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point, at a distance at which the user can be aware of the robot 100 and at which the user cannot be touched (a second distance longer than the first distance)…recognizing unit 156 may acquire a facial image of the user, and the expression recognizing unit 230 may confirm the expression of the user from the facial image….movement determining unit 138 may cause the approach to the user to be continued when the user exhibits predetermined behavior allowing an approach." as well as ¶¶0132 via "When the robot 100 visually recognizes a user, and detects a touch (physical contact) from the user, it is determined that interest in the robot 100 has been shown by the user, and familiarity increases" **Which illustrates that the familiarity is derived from the reaction and is updated overtime, thus stored. *Wherein the familiarity is an example of an operation parameter, the classification of positive/negative reactions is another example of an operation parameter).
However, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the presenting the revised operation parameters.
Nevertheless, Vu discloses: present the revised operation parameters of the nursing care robot to the information terminal to allow the staff member of the nursing facility to edit the operation parameters (See at least ¶0044 via "The robot may further include a transmitter for notifying a caregiver when the medication is not dispensed according to schedule" and also ¶0220 via "The snooze routine may be limited in recurrences for particular regimens deemed more important, but not critical, by the resident, caregiver, or robot (e.g., medication compliance, therapeutic compliance, etc.)…..Such delays may be managed by postponement rules that provide guidelines as to how many times and how long medication may be delayed or refused, and whether and how a caregiver is to be notified upon a delay or refusal").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of Vu's presentation of the revised parameters to the staff member/caregiver to enable to staff member to make adjustments (such as limiting a snooze routine) in order to ensure the resident/patient is receiving proper care, as well as to expand the types of operation parameters that can be considered.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20190077021 A1), Florencio et. al. (US 20190248015 A1), Asukai et. al. (US 20180081365 A1, corresponding to WO2016170808A1 in the IDS), and Vu et. al. (US 20070192910 A1) in view of Al-shaikhi et. al. (US 20160257004 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 5.
However, although Hayashi discloses approaching a care receiving object person, and Vu discloses obstacle detection, avoidance, and changing an angle; Modified Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the approach angle increasing with a decreasing distance.
Nevertheless, Al-shaikhi--who is directed towards robotic control--discloses: wherein, in a case where the obstacle is determined to be present, the processing circuitry is configured to change the approach angle such that the approach angle increases with a decreasing distance to the care-receiving object person (See at least ¶0050 and **annotated/labeled** Figures 11C and 11D which show a robot at a starting point and end point/destination respectively. Additionally, see zoomed in **annotated/labeled** Figure 11D which illustrates that when there is an obstacle present, the obstacle is avoided and the approach angle with respect to the end point/target is increasing (moving closer to 90°) as the distance decreases, as indicated by the drawn lines connecting the location of a robot on a trajectory to the end position/target- which form the angles).
PNG
media_image4.png
515
691
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
459
362
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to further modify Modified Hayashi in further view of the increasing approach angle with decreasing distance to the end point/target destination as illustrated in Figures 11C-11D of Al-shaikhi in order to effectively avoid the obstacle by turning and circumnavigating it, especially in a case as shown where the obstacle is located directly in front of the target point, thus increasing safety and avoiding collision.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20190077021 A1), Florencio et. al. (US 20190248015 A1), Asukai et. al. (US 20180081365 A1, corresponding to WO2016170808A1 in the IDS), and Vu et. al. (US 20070192910 A1), in view of Kazuo et. al. (WO2020075553A1, attached in non-final correspondence dated 07/29/2025).
Regarding Claim 8, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 5.
Furthermore, Asukai discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to change the approach angle such that the approach angle increases (See at least Figure 7 which illustrates the angle increasing with the decreasing distance: Ang. 2 > Ang. 1, as the robot approaches the target person)
PNG
media_image6.png
697
515
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi in view of disclosing an approach angle increasing with a decreasing distance towards the care receiving object person, because when the robot approaches the person from a certain angle, it has a certain influence to the person (compared to other angles): "For example, even at the same distance, a robot gives a different psychological influence to a person depending on whether the robot is in front of, obliquely in front of, beside, or behind the communication partner." [Asukai ¶0008], and when the robot is closer to the person, the robot can establish a more familiar relationship without causing the person stress: " when the mobile body 1 is side-by-side with the target person 2, the mobile body 1 adjusts an angle to face the same direction as the target person 2 to establish a more familiar relationship with the target person 2 without causing the target person 2 stress." [Asukai ¶0053].
However, Modified Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the consideration of the care-receiving object person's dominant hand.
Nevertheless, Kazou--who is directed towards a robot that arranges elements/objects based on the characteristics of the user--discloses: side of a direction of a dominant hand (See at least ¶0017 via "More specifically, the robot apparatus 100 acquires physical information regarding a target user to whom objects are to be delivered, and determines, on the basis of the physical information regarding the target user, the positions where the objects are to be arranged at the time of delivery of the objects to the target user. For example, the robot apparatus 100 determines the arrangement positions of the objects in accordance with a range that permits the target user to move his/her body and is based on the physical information regarding the target user. The physical information regarding the target user may include information regarding, for example, age, an arm length, a dominant arm, physical disability, and a possible upper body inclination amount, but need not be limited to such information.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to further modify Modified Hayashi in further view of Kazou's delivering of items based on the characteristics of the target person/user in order to accommodate any physical limitations of the target user and make the retrieval of the delivered items easier for the target user: "determines the arrangement positions of the objects in accordance with a range that permits the target user to move his/her body and is based on the physical information regarding the target user" [Kazou ¶0017].
Regarding Claim 9, Modified Hayashi discloses the robot operating system according to Claim 8.
Furthermore, Hayashi discloses the nursing care robot and the care-receiving object person (See at least Figure 1A and ¶0245 via "user") and
cause the nursing care robot to approach the care-receiving object person from (See at least ¶0245 via "When the robot 100 is to approach to a distance at which the robot 100 can be touched by a user (a first distance), the action determining unit 140 may cause the robot 100 to perform a gesture of stopping once and watching the user closely before reaching a final approach point")
However, Hayashi does not explicitly disclose determining whether the robot is movable on a side.
Nevertheless, Vu discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to determine, on a basis of the measurement information whether or not the nursing care robot is movable on side (See at least ¶0043 via "The generating the map may include controlling the mobile robot to traverse the robot's environment and to detect walls and obstacles" and Figure 14a which illustrates the robot recognizing when moving in a direction is unavailable due to a wall or obstacle (for example, the robot cannot move from Room 2 to Room 4 without going around the wall))
PNG
media_image7.png
447
393
media_image7.png
Greyscale
in a case where the nursing care robot is determined as not movable on side of the direction (See at least ¶0058 via "The method may also include the steps of selecting the next location based on an arbitrary heading and an arbitrary distance for the mobile robot to travel, moving in the direction of the arbitrary heading, adjusting a direction of travel of the mobile robot to avoid an obstacle, returning to the arbitrary heading when the obstacle is avoided, and continuing movement in the direction of the arbitrary heading until the mobile robot has traveled the arbitrary distance." which illustrates that the robot recognizes when it is not movable in a specific location (obstacle) and the robot performs obstacle avoidance where it adjusts the direction based on the obstacle location being unavailable to move in).
However, Modified Hayashi does not explicitly disclose the consideration of the care-receiving object person's dominant hand.
Nevertheless, Kazou discloses: side of the direction of the dominant hand of the care-receiving object person and
side of a direction different from the direction of the dominant hand of the care-receiving object person (See at least ¶0017 via "More specifically, the robot apparatus 100 acquires physical information regarding a target user to whom objects are to be delivered, and determines, on the basis of the physical information regarding the target user, the positions where the objects are to be arranged at the time of delivery of the objects to the target user. For example, the robot apparatus 100 determines the arrangement positions of the objects in accordance with a range that permits the target user to move his/her body and is based on the physical information regarding the target user. The physical information regarding the target user may include information regarding, for example, age, an arm length, a dominant arm, physical disability, and a possible upper body inclination amount, but need not be limited to such information.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Modified Hayashi to disclose a situation where the side of the dominant hand of the target person/user is obstructed (for example, by an obstacle) and the robot has to approach from an alternate side/direction, in order for the robot to be able to continue its task/operation when the ideal approach location/direction is unavailable. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that although the side of a target person's dominant hand may be obstructed and unavailable (such as due to an obstacle), it is preferable to approach from another available location/direction in order to still be able to complete the task at hand, rather than becoming stuck and unable to continue.
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 KAYLA RENEE DOROS whose telephone number is (703)756-1415. The examiner can normally be reached Generally: M-F (8-5) EST.
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, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. 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.
/K.R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ABBY LIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657