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 .
This final action is in response to Applicant’s filing dated February 18, 2026. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been considered, as provided in more detail below. Claims 1-12 and 15 have been amended.
*Examiner Note: Claim language is bolded. Cited References and Applicant’s arguments are italicized. Examiner interpretations are preceded with an asterisk *.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/16/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and they are moot.
Regarding Applicant’s remarks on pages 8-12 of the response, the Examiner respectfully
does not agree due to the following reasons: The combination of Jones, Kawamoto and Usami is being relied upon to illustrate the second calculation mode, under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Specifically, Kawamoto teaches acquiring information associated with a plurality of targets disposed within a worksite environment (see at least para. [0052] of Kawamoto); ”visual-simultaneous localization and mapping“ techniques (see at least para. [0130] of Kawamoto) and determining “ the position and orientation “information using the captured target information (see at least para. [0064] of Kawamoto). Therefore, it is evident that Kawamoto teaches or at least suggests “the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine are calculated based on the image of the plurality of targets” as broadly as recited. Applicant asserts that Jones focuses solely on machine control using GNSS and does not disclose switching between calculating the position using GNSS to a second calculation method that does not use GNSS. The Examiner respectfully does not agree because the rejection does not solely rely on Jones for the claimed switching functionality. Jones teaches an agricultural machine control system; GNSS positioning; determination of machine orientation/heading and optical guidance observations using components and characteristics of the working vehicle (see at least para. [0029] of Jones). In this connection, Jones does teach calculating a position and azimuth/orientation angle of a work machine based on GNSS signals. Therefore, Applicant’s argument on page 8 of the remarks regarding the second calculation method is not persuasive. Accordingly, the Examiner determines that the combined teachings of Kawamoto and Usami teach or at least reasonably suggest the claimed second calculation mode. Applicant’s disagreement does not persuasively explain why one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would not have understood the cited optical target-based localization techniques as corresponding to the claimed image-based position/azimuth calculation mode, under the broadest reasonable interpretation. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). This rejection properly relies on the collective teachings of the cited references under 35 U.S.C. §103.
Further, regarding applicant’s arguments toward rejections under 35 USC 103, the
arguments are considered moot because they are directed toward subject matter that has not been previously set forth and has necessitated new grounds of rejection.
Response to Amendment
Regarding the rejections under 35 USC 112, Applicant has amended the claims and the
rejections under 35 USC 112 have been withdrawn.
Regarding the rejections under 35 USC 103, amendments made to the claims have
necessitated new grounds of rejection as outlined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 and 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 2014/0324291A1) in view of Kawamoto (US 2019/0360174A1) and Takeuchi (JP2005003445A) and further in view of Usami (JP 2008180598A).
Regarding amended claim 1, Jones discloses A control system (Fig. 2, 100 and see at least
para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “a control system 100. The control system 100 may include, without limitation, a controller/computer 102, a display 104 and an input device 106, such as a keypad or keyboard for operation of the control system 100”) of a work machine (Fig. 1, 10 and see at least para. [0083] of Jones which discloses “an illustrative vehicle 10” and see at least para. [0120] of Jones which discloses “The vehicle (e.g., a motive component or tractor) 10 is connected to a working component”, *Examiner interprets the vehicle/tractor 10 to be a work machine), comprising a processor (see Fig. 3 and at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”), the processor being configured to: calculates a position and an azimuth angle (see at least para. [0088] of Jones which discloses “the azimuth determination processes in order to reduce the time required to solve for accurate azimuth” and see at least para. [0075] of Jones which discloses “gyroscopes can … obtain roll, pitch and heading angles with occasional adjustment from the GNSS-derived attitude“, *Examiner interprets the heading angles to also be examples of the azimuth angle) of the work machine based on a GNSS radio signal (see at least para. [0009] of Jones which discloses “determining an attitude of the vehicle from the GNSS ranging signals“ and see at least para. [0010] of Jones which discloses “positional tracking, earth-moving equipment can perform cut, fill, and other earth-moving functions using GNSS positioning data for greater repeatable accuracy and operating efficiencies” and see at least para. [0022] of Jones which discloses “a plurality of global navigation satellite systems (GNSSs) including receivers and antennas at a fixed spacing to determine a vehicle position, velocity and at least one of a heading (slew) angle, a pitch angle and a roll angle”, *Examiner interprets this as evidence of position and azimuth angle calculation of the work machine based on a GNSS radio signal).
Jones does disclose a GNSS and a radio signal (see at least para. [0078] of Jones which
discloses “GNSS includes the Global Positioning System (GPS), which … employs a constellation of 24 or more satellites … These satellites continually transmit microwave L-band radio signals … GPS receivers process the radio signals”, *Examiner reasonably interprets the radio signals to be the GNSS radio waves because radio signals from satellites are GNSS radio waves). Jones may not explicitly use the phrase “a GNSS radio wave”, although Jones teaches receiving GNSS L-Band radio signals which the Examiner interprets as GNSS radio waves.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kawamoto discloses a GNSS radio wave (see at
least para. [0031] of Kawamoto which discloses “GNSS radio waves and outputs signals in accordance with the received GNSS radio waves. The antennas 25F and 25S may use an antenna for global positioning system (GPS)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to modify the work machine control system of Jones to calculate the machine’s position and an azimuth angle based on a GNSS radio wave, as taught by Kawamoto with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the accuracy and robustness of the work machine’s orientation in a three-dimensional space and to improve the azimuth angle determination during machine operation by incorporating GNSS based azimuth and position measurements. See para. [0031] and [0057] – [0058] of Kawamoto for motivation.
Jones, as modified by Kawamoto, may not explicitly disclose the processor configured to
calculate the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine based on an image of a plurality of targets disposed around the work machine in a work site and a mode in which the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine are calculated based on the image of the plurality of targets.
However, Takeuchi discloses calculating the position of a mobile work machine based on
images of target markers (see at least para. [0042] of Takeuchi which discloses “a method for calculating the position of the moving carriage based on the positional relationship between the detected camera position and the two detected target markers”. Takeuchi further discloses that “The above calculation processing is performed in the position coordinate calculation unit 30 in the control unit 18” – see at least para. [0059] and Takeuchi additionally discloses “Based on the image and the position information of each target marker by the storage means, the position calculation means Since the mobile device's self-position is calculated, it is easy to find the target marker as a position reference even in a complicated environment such as a work site, and identification using a large number of target markers is ensured. It is possible to identify the self-position of the mobile device with high accuracy” – see at least para. [0071]. Takeuchi, therefore teaches calculating the position of the work machine based on images of target markers) and the azimuth angle (see at least para. [0015] of Takeuchi which discloses “a camera rotation unit capable of capturing an azimuth image … the calculation is performed in consideration of the rotation angle of the camera rotation unit”, *This corresponds to determining orientation/azimuth related information associated with the work machine/mobile device) of the work machine (see at least para. [0072] of Takeuchi which discloses “When calculating the self-position of the mobile device, the calculation is performed taking into account the rotation angle of the camera rotation means”, *The Examiner interprets the disclosed rotation-angle based orientation processing and azimuth image capture as corresponding to the claimed azimuth angle calculation because the disclosed processing determines angular orientation of the mobile device relative to surrounding target markers) based on an image of a plurality of targets (Fig. 1, 19a-19d and see at least para. [0030] of Takeuchi which discloses “a plurality of target markers 19a to 19d, which are used as position references when the mobile carriage 10 identifies its own position”) disposed around (see at least para. [0019] of Takeuchi which discloses “a target marker located around the mobile device”) the work machine (Fig. 1, 10 and see at least para. [0029] of Takeuchi which discloses “an autonomous mobile carriage (hereinafter abbreviated as a mobile carriage) 10 as a mobile equipment works in a complicated work site such as a construction / construction site”) in a work site (see at least para. [0041] of Takeuchi which discloses “the mobile carriage 10 and the target markers 19a to 19d … is depicted as being placed on the ground at the work site”) and a mode in which the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine are calculated based on the image of the plurality of targets (see at least para. [0042] of Takeuchi which discloses “a method for calculating the position of the moving carriage based on the positional relationship between the detected camera position and the two detected target markers”. Takeuchi further discloses “Based on the image and the position information of each target marker by the storage means, the position calculation means Since the mobile device's self-position is calculated, it is easy to find the target marker as a position reference“ (see at least para. [0071]). The Examiner interprets this as calculating the position of the work machine based on images of a plurality of targets. Finally, Takeuchi discloses “a camera rotation unit capable of capturing an azimuth image – see at least para. [0015] of Takeuchi and see at least para. [0072] of Takeuchi which discloses “the calculation is performed taking into account the rotation angle of the camera rotation means”. The Examiner interprets the disclosed azimuth-image capture and rotation-angle-based orientation processing as corresponding to calculating the azimuth angle of the work machine base don images of the plurality of targets because the disclosed processing determine angular orientation of the mobile device relative to surrounding target markers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to modify the control system of Jones, as modified by Kawamoto, to include the processor configured to calculate the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine based on an image of a plurality of targets disposed around the work machine in a work site and a mode in which the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine are calculated based on the image of the plurality of targets, as taught in Takeuchi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve localization robustness and maintain accurate determination of the work machine’s position and azimuth/orientation when GNSS positioning becomes degraded, obstructed or unavailable by utilizing known image based target marker localization techniques using externally disposed positional reference targets surrounding the work machine within the worksite environment. See para. [0014]-[0015] and [0030] of Takeuchi for motivation.
Jones, in view of Kawamoto and Takeuchi, discloses the limitation “in which the position
and the azimuth angle (see at least para. [0088] of Jones which discloses “the azimuth determination processes in order to reduce the time required to solve for accurate azimuth”; see at least para. [0009] of Jones which discloses “determining an attitude of the vehicle from the GNSS ranging signals“ and see at least para. [0022] of Jones which discloses “a plurality of global navigation satellite systems (GNSSs) … to determine a vehicle position, velocity and at least one of a heading (slew) angle”) of the work machine are calculated based on the GNSS radio wave” (see at least para. [0078] of Jones which discloses “satellites continually transmit microwave L-band radio signals … GPS receivers process the radio signals”, *The Examiner interprets the disclosed GNSS radio signals a corresponding to the claimed GNSS radio waves because GNSS satellite transmissions naturally constitute GNSS radio waves. The Examiner further interprets the disclosed heading/slew angle and azimuth determination as corresponding to the claimed azimuth angle because each represents angular orientation of the work machine relative to a reference direction).
Jones, in view of Kawamoto and Takeuchi may not explicitly disclose and switches between
a first calculation mode and a second calculation mode.
However, Usami discloses switching between a first calculation mode and a second
calculation mode (see at least pg. 5 of Usami which discloses “The mode switching unit 208 performs mode selection between the normal mode and the carrier priority mode. … When the normal mode is selected, the pseudo distance ρ calculated in the normal mode block 210 is supplied from the normal mode block 210 to the positioning calculation unit 24. The positioning calculation unit 24 performs the above-described positioning calculation based on the pseudo distance ρ supplied from the normal mode block 210”, *Examiner interprets this to be evidence of switching between a first calculation mode and a second calculation mode in which the second position/azimuth calculation unit calculates the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine, *The Examiner interprets the disclosed mode switching and alternative positing calculations as corresponding to “switches between a first calculation mode … and a second calculation mode” because Usami teaches selectively changing between different positioning calculation methodologies responsive to positioning conditions. Although Usami’s disclosed positioning modes utilize satellite-based positioning information, Usami nevertheless teaches the broader concept of switching between alternative positioning calculations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to apply the switching techniques of Usami to the GNSS-based positioning calculation of Jones and the image-based target positioning calculation of Takeuchi, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve localization robustness and maintain accurate work-machine positioning when one positioning methodology becomes degraded, obstructed or unreliable).
Regarding claim 2, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the processor (see Fig. 3 and at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”) is configured to switch between the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode based on a reception state of the GNSS radio wave (see at least pg. 6 of Usami which discloses “In the mode switching method shown in FIG. 8, the carrier-oriented mode is formed when the number of observable GPS satellites 10 is equal to or less than the predetermined number Th. The carrier emphasis mode may be formed when the signal strength (reception level) decreases”).
Regarding claim 3, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the processor is configured to switch between the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode based on whether the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine (see at least pg. 3 of Usami which discloses “the positioning calculation unit 24 receives, from the vehicle sensor 28 such as an INS (inertial navigation system) sensor 26 that detects the movement mode of the vehicle 90, a vehicle speed sensor, a rudder angle sensor, and an azimuth meter as necessary. The positioning result may be corrected using the information”) can be calculated by the first calculation mode (see at least para. [0023] of Jones which discloses “computing a first position of a first GNSS antenna on the vehicle” and see at least para. [0088] of Jones which discloses “the azimuth determination processes in order to reduce the time required to solve for accurate azimuth, even though both antennas 26 a and 26 b may be moving in space or not at a known location. The technique of resolving the attitude information and position information for the vehicle 10 may employ carrier phase DGNSS techniques with a moving reference station”).
Regarding claim 4, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the processor (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”) is configured to cause a display device to display a reception state of the GNSS radio wave (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The control system 100 may include, without limitation, a controller/computer 102, a display 104… The control system 100 will also allow the operator to configure the various settings of the sensor system 20 and monitor GNSS signal reception”).
Regarding claim 5, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the processor (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”) is configured to switch between the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode based on input data from an input device (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “an input device 106, such as a keypad or keyboard for operation of the control system 100”).
Regarding claim 8, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the display device is disposed in a cab of the work machine (see at least para. [0060] of Jones which discloses “a monitor located in a cab of the snow grooming equipment” and see at least para. [0166] of Jones which discloses “a computer display connected to the GNSS system wirelessly, or a wired display within the cab of the excavator”).
Regarding claim 9, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
comprising: an inclination sensor disposed in the work machine, the processor being further configured to: that calculates an inclination angle of the work machine based on detection data of the inclination sensor (see at least para. [0087] of Jones which discloses “the data used by each GNSS receiver 24 may be coupled with data from supplementary sensors 50, including, but not limited to, accelerometers, gyroscopic sensors, compasses, magnetic sensors, inclinometers, and the like, as well as combinations including at least one of the foregoing”, *Examiner interprets that since sensors 50 include inclinometers, then there are inclination sensors and the inclination angle is calculated) calculates the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine based on the image of the plurality of targets and the inclination angle of the work machine (see at least para. [0052] of Kawamoto which discloses “position calculation unit 41D determines a three-dimensional position around the excavator 1 by using the obtained position and attitude of the excavator 1 and images captured by at least one pair of imaging devices 30 at a plurality of positions in the swinging direction of the swing body 3”, *Examiner interprets position calculation unit 41D to be a second position/azimuth calculation unit since a plurality of units 41B-41F are described).
Regarding claim 10, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the work machine includes a traveling body (Fig. 21 of Jones, base portion with the wheels for traveling forward and see at least para. [0163] of Jones which discloses “The guidance system is then initialized at 1060, and the system guides the excavator 1004 throughout the site's various cut and fill zones 1020, 1022”) and a turning body (Fig. 21, turning portion that allows rotation so that the arm 1006 moves and see at least para. [0154] of Jones which discloses “the excavator 1004 equipped with an articulated arm comprised of a hingedly connected boom 1006, a stick 1008 and a bucket 1010. FIG. 21 demonstrates the six possible directions of movement the GNSS system can detect, including roll, pitch and slew (comparable to yaw) rotation about the X, Y, and Z axes respectively”), the inclination sensor (see at least para. [0087] of Jones which discloses “the data used by each GNSS receiver 24 may be coupled with data from supplementary sensors 50, including, but not limited to, accelerometers, gyroscopic sensors, compasses, magnetic sensors, inclinometers, and the like, as well as combinations including at least one of the foregoing”, *Examiner interprets that since sensors 50 include inclinometers, then there are inclination sensors and the inclination angle is calculated) is disposed in the turning body (see at least claim 5 of Jones which discloses “a vehicle operating parameter sensor on said vehicle”), the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine are a position and an azimuth angle of the turning body, and when the processor (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”) is in a state of being incapable of calculating the position (see at least the translation of Usami which discloses “In the initial distance calculation mode, the positioning calculation unit 24 does not perform the positioning calculation, and the vehicle position (X uMAP , Y uMAP , Z uMAP ) on the highly reliable map data is determined. The positioning result is output as it is”) and the azimuth angle of the turning body by the first calculation mode and the traveling body has not performed a traveling motion and the turning body has performed a turning motion (see at least the translation of Usami which discloses “ the positioning calculation unit 24 receives, from the vehicle sensor 28 such as an INS (inertial navigation system) sensor 26 that detects the movement mode of the vehicle 90, a vehicle speed sensor, a rudder angle sensor, and an azimuth meter as necessary. The positioning result may be corrected using the information”), processor (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”) calculates the position and the azimuth angle of the turning body by the second calculation mode (see discussion above for calculations by first and second calculation modes) based on an image of at least one target acquired after the turning body has performed the turning motion (see at least translation of Usami which discloses “the positioning calculation unit 24 obtains the position information of the vehicle 90 based on the movement mode of the vehicle 90 estimated based on the INS sensor 26 and the vehicle sensor 28 while the satellite signal cannot be received such as during a tunnel traveling”).
Regarding claim 11, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the work machine includes a traveling body (Fig. 21 of Jones, base portion with the wheels for traveling forward and see at least para. [0163] of Jones which discloses “The guidance system is then initialized at 1060, and the system guides the excavator 1004 throughout the site's various cut and fill zones 1020, 1022”) and a turning body (Fig. 21, turning portion that allows rotation so that the arm 1006 moves and see at least para. [0154] of Jones which discloses “the excavator 1004 equipped with an articulated arm comprised of a hingedly connected boom 1006, a stick 1008 and a bucket 1010. FIG. 21 demonstrates the six possible directions of movement the GNSS system can detect, including roll, pitch and slew (comparable to yaw) rotation about the X, Y, and Z axes respectively”), the inclination sensor (see at least para. [0087] of Jones which discloses “the data used by each GNSS receiver 24 may be coupled with data from supplementary sensors 50, including, but not limited to, accelerometers, gyroscopic sensors, compasses, magnetic sensors, inclinometers, and the like, as well as combinations including at least one of the foregoing”, *Examiner interprets that since sensors 50 include inclinometers, then there are inclination sensors and the inclination angle is calculated) is disposed in the turning body (see at least claim 5 of Jones which discloses “a vehicle operating parameter sensor on said vehicle”), the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine are a position and an azimuth angle of the turning body, and processor (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”) is in a state of being incapable of calculating the position (see at least the translation of Usami which discloses “In the initial distance calculation mode, the positioning calculation unit 24 does not perform the positioning calculation, and the vehicle position (X uMAP , Y uMAP , Z uMAP ) on the highly reliable map data is determined. The positioning result is output as it is”) and the azimuth angle of the turning body by the first calculation mode and the traveling body has not performed a traveling motion and the turning body has performed a turning motion (see at least the translation of Usami which discloses “ the positioning calculation unit 24 receives, from the vehicle sensor 28 such as an INS (inertial navigation system) sensor 26 that detects the movement mode of the vehicle 90, a vehicle speed sensor, a rudder angle sensor, and an azimuth meter as necessary. The positioning result may be corrected using the informationr”), processor calculates the position and the azimuth angle of the turning body by the second calculation mode based on detection data obtained by the inclination sensor after the turning body has performed the turning motion (see at least translation of Usami which discloses “the positioning calculation unit 24 obtains the position information of the vehicle 90 based on the movement mode of the vehicle 90 estimated based on the INS sensor 26 and the vehicle sensor 28 while the satellite signal cannot be received such as during a tunnel traveling”).
Regarding claim 12, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the processor is configured to correct an error of the inclination sensor, and the processor is configured to correct errors (see at least para. [0022] of Jones which discloses “The roll angle facilitates correction of the lateral motion induced position errors resultant from motion of the antennae as the vehicle moves based on an offset to ground and the roll angle”) of the position and azimuth angle of the turning body based on a calculation result of the first calculation mode in a state where calculating the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine is capable by the first calculation mode and corrects the errors of the position and the azimuth angle of the turning body (see at least para. [0147] of Jones which discloses “Direct connections among the components further enhance accuracy and facilitate high dynamic roll corrections, as described above. Continuous base and rover ranging data are available for positioning and control. With the 2+1 and the 2+2 configurations, the fixed baseline(s) provide heading and ROT guidance for the vehicle and/or the implement. Steering control for the vehicle is derived from crosstrack error computations utilizing the multiposition tail 792”) based on a calculation result(see at least the translation of Usami which discloses “In the initial distance calculation mode, the positioning calculation unit 24 does not perform the positioning calculation, and the vehicle position (X uMAP , Y uMAP , Z uMAP ) on the highly reliable map data is determined. The positioning result is output as it is”) and the azimuth angle of the work machine (see at least the translation of Usami which discloses “ the positioning calculation unit 24 receives, from the vehicle sensor 28 such as an INS (inertial navigation system) sensor 26 that detects the movement mode of the vehicle 90, a vehicle speed sensor, a rudder angle sensor, and an azimuth meter as necessary. The positioning result may be corrected using the informationr”) is incapable by the first calculation mode.
Regarding claim 13, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the work machine includes a traveling body (Fig. 21, base portion with the wheels for traveling forward and see at least “The guidance system is then initialized at 1060, and the system guides the excavator 1004 throughout the site's various cut and fill zones 1020, 1022”) and a turning body (Fig. 21, turning portion that allows rotation so that the arm 1006 moves and see at least para. [0154] of Jones which discloses “the excavator 1004 equipped with an articulated arm comprised of a hingedly connected boom 1006, a stick 1008 and a bucket 1010. FIG. 21 demonstrates the six possible directions of movement the GNSS system can detect, including roll, pitch and slew (comparable to yaw) rotation about the X, Y, and Z axes respectively”), and the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine are a position and an azimuth angle of the turning body (see at least para. [0156] of Jones which discloses “the IMU 1015 for computing a complex position/orientation/attitude solution for the excavator 1004, including solutions for its individual articulated components of interest, in relation to a specific grading plan, GIS database or other project information source”).
Regarding claim 14, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses A
work machine comprising the control system of the work machine according to claim 1 (see at least para. [0027] of Jones which discloses “equipment, such as an excavator, grader, bulldozer, loader or the like”, *Examiner interprets these to be examples of a work machine with a control system).
Regarding amended claim 15, Jones discloses A method of controlling (see at least para.
[0092] of Jones which discloses “the control system 100 computes and outputs a cross-track and/or a direction error relating to the current orientation, attitude, and velocity of the vehicle 10 as well as computing a desired swath on the ground. The control system 100 will also allow the operator to configure the various settings of the sensor system 20 and monitor GNSS signal reception and any other sensors of the sensor system 20. In an exemplary embodiment, the sensor system 20 is self-contained”) a work machine (Fig. 1, 10 and see at least para. [0083] of Jones which discloses “an illustrative vehicle 10” and see at least para. [0120] of Jones which discloses “The vehicle (e.g., a motive component or tractor) 10 is connected to a working component”, *Examiner interprets the vehicle/tractor 10 to be a work machine), comprising: calculating a position and an azimuth angle (see at least para. [0088] of Jones which discloses “the azimuth determination processes in order to reduce the time required to solve for accurate azimuth” and see at least para. [0075] of Jones which discloses “gyroscopes can … obtain roll, pitch and heading angles with occasional adjustment from the GNSS-derived attitude“, *Examiner interprets the heading angles to also be examples of the azimuth angle) of the work machine in a first calculation mode (see at least para. [0023] of Jones which discloses “computing a first position of a first GNSS antenna on the vehicle” and see at least para. [0088] of Jones which discloses “the azimuth determination processes in order to reduce the time required to solve for accurate azimuth, even though both antennas 26 a and 26 b may be moving in space or not at a known location. The technique of resolving the attitude information and position information for the vehicle 10 may employ carrier phase DGNSS techniques with a moving reference station”) based on a GNSS radio signal (see at least para. [0009] of Jones which discloses “determining an attitude of the vehicle from the GNSS ranging signals“ and see at least para. [0010] of Jones which discloses “positional tracking, earth-moving equipment can perform cut, fill, and other earth-moving functions using GNSS positioning data for greater repeatable accuracy and operating efficiencies” and see at least para. [0022] of Jones which discloses “a plurality of global navigation satellite systems (GNSSs) including receivers and antennas at a fixed spacing to determine a vehicle position, velocity and at least one of a heading (slew) angle, a pitch angle and a roll angle”, *Examiner interprets this as evidence of position and azimuth angle calculation of the work machine based on a GNSS radio signal).
Jones does disclose a GNSS and a radio signal (see at least para. [0078] of Jones which
discloses “GNSS includes the Global Positioning System (GPS), which … employs a constellation of 24 or more satellites … These satellites continually transmit microwave L-band radio signals … GPS receivers process the radio signals”, *Examiner reasonably interprets the radio signals to be the GNSS radio waves because radio signals from satellites are GNSS radio waves).
Jones may not explicitly use the phrase “a GNSS radio wave”, although Jones teaches
receiving GNSS L-Band radio signals which the Examiner interprets as GNSS radio waves.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kawamoto discloses a GNSS radio wave (see at
least para. [0031] of Kawamoto which discloses “GNSS radio waves and outputs signals in accordance with the received GNSS radio waves. The antennas 25F and 25S may use an antenna for global positioning system (GPS)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to modify the work machine control system of Jones to calculate the machine’s position and an azimuth angle based on a GNSS radio wave, as taught by Kawamoto with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the accuracy and robustness of the work machine’s orientation in a three-dimensional space and to improve the azimuth angle determination during machine operation by incorporating GNSS based azimuth and position measurements. See para. [0031] and [0057] – [0058] of Kawamoto for motivation.
Jones, as modified by Kawamoto, may not explicitly disclose calculating the position and
the azimuth angle of the work machine based on an image of a plurality of targets disposed around the work machine in a work site.
However, Takeuchi discloses calculating the position of a mobile work machine based on
images of target markers (see at least para. [0042] of Takeuchi which discloses “a method for calculating the position of the moving carriage based on the positional relationship between the detected camera position and the two detected target markers”. Takeuchi further discloses that “The above calculation processing is performed in the position coordinate calculation unit 30 in the control unit 18” – see at least para. [0059] and Takeuchi additionally discloses “Based on the image and the position information of each target marker by the storage means, the position calculation means Since the mobile device's self-position is calculated, it is easy to find the target marker as a position reference even in a complicated environment such as a work site, and identification using a large number of target markers is ensured. It is possible to identify the self-position of the mobile device with high accuracy” – see at least para. [0071]. Takeuchi, therefore teaches calculating the position of the work machine based on images of target markers) and the azimuth angle (see at least para. [0015] of Takeuchi which discloses “a camera rotation unit capable of capturing an azimuth image … the calculation is performed in consideration of the rotation angle of the camera rotation unit”, *This corresponds to determining orientation/azimuth related information associated with the work machine/mobile device) of the work machine (see at least para. [0072] of Takeuchi which discloses “When calculating the self-position of the mobile device, the calculation is performed taking into account the rotation angle of the camera rotation means”, *The Examiner interprets the disclosed rotation-angle based orientation processing and azimuth image capture as corresponding to the claimed azimuth angle calculation because the disclosed processing determines angular orientation of the mobile device relative to surrounding target markers) based on an image of a plurality of targets (Fig. 1, 19a-19d and see at least para. [0030] of Takeuchi which discloses “a plurality of target markers 19a to 19d, which are used as position references when the mobile carriage 10 identifies its own position”) disposed around (see at least para. [0019] of Takeuchi which discloses “a target marker located around the mobile device”) the work machine (Fig. 1, 10 and see at least para. [0029] of Takeuchi which discloses “an autonomous mobile carriage (hereinafter abbreviated as a mobile carriage) 10 as a mobile equipment works in a complicated work site such as a construction / construction site”) in a work site (see at least para. [0041] of Takeuchi which discloses “the mobile carriage 10 and the target markers 19a to 19d … is depicted as being placed on the ground at the work site”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to modify the control system of Jones, as modified by Kawamoto, to include calculating the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine based on an image of a plurality of targets disposed around the work machine in a work site, as taught in Takeuchi with a reasonable expectation of success in order facilitate image-based determination of machine position and azimuth form targets disposed around the machine, since arranging multiple target markers around a mobile machine in a work site environment for image-based localization is a known technique for improving positional-identification accuracy and localization robustness. See para. [0014]-[0015] and [0030] of Takeuchi for motivation.
Jones, in view of Kawamoto and Takeuchi may not explicitly disclose switching the first
calculation mode and the second calculation mode.
However, Usami discloses switching the first calculation mode and the second calculation
mode (see at least pg. 5 of Usami which discloses “The mode switching unit 208 performs mode selection between the normal mode and the carrier priority mode. … When the normal mode is selected, the pseudo distance ρ calculated in the normal mode block 210 is supplied from the normal mode block 210 to the positioning calculation unit 24. The positioning calculation unit 24 performs the above-described positioning calculation based on the pseudo distance ρ supplied from the normal mode block 210”, *Examiner interprets this to be evidence of switching between a first calculation mode and a second calculation mode in which the second position/azimuth calculation unit calculates the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine, *The Examiner interprets the disclosed mode switching and alternative positing calculations as corresponding to “switching the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode” because Usami teaches selectively changing between different positioning calculation methodologies responsive to positioning conditions. Although Usami’s disclosed positioning modes utilize satellite-based positioning information, Usami nevertheless teaches the broader concept of switching between alternative positioning calculations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to apply the switching techniques of Usami to the GNSS-based positioning calculation of Jones and the image-based target positioning calculation of Takeuchi, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve localization robustness and maintain accurate work-machine positioning when one positioning methodology becomes degraded, obstructed or unreliable).
Regarding claim 16, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode are switched based on a reception state of the GNSS radio wave (see at least pg. 6 of Usami which discloses “In the mode switching method shown in FIG. 8, the carrier-oriented mode is formed when the number of observable GPS satellites 10 is equal to or less than the predetermined number Th. The carrier emphasis mode may be formed when the signal strength (reception level) decreases”).
Regarding claim 17, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode are switched based on whether the position and the azimuth angle of the work machine can be calculated in the first calculation mode (see at least pg. 3 of Usami which discloses “the positioning calculation unit 24 receives, from the vehicle sensor 28 such as an INS (inertial navigation system) sensor 26 that detects the movement mode of the vehicle 90, a vehicle speed sensor, a rudder angle sensor, and an azimuth meter as necessary. The positioning result may be corrected using the information. The INS sensor 26 may include a gyro sensor and a G (acceleration) sensor. For example, the positioning calculation unit 24 obtains the position information of the vehicle 90 based on the movement mode of the vehicle 90 estimated based on the INS sensor 26 and the vehicle sensor 28 while the satellite signal cannot be received such as during a tunnel traveling. It may be generated”).
Regarding claim 18, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
displaying a reception state of the GNSS radio wave (see at least pg. 6 of Usami which discloses “In the mode switching method shown in FIG. 8, the carrier-oriented mode is formed when the number of observable GPS satellites 10 is equal to or less than the predetermined number Th. The carrier emphasis mode may be formed when the signal strength (reception level) decreases”) on a display device (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The control system 100 may include, without limitation, a controller/computer 102, a display 104… The control system 100 will also allow the operator to configure the various settings of the sensor system 20 and monitor GNSS signal reception”).
Regarding claim 19, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode are switched based on input data from an input device (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “an input device 106, such as a keypad or keyboard for operation of the control system 100”).
Claims 6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 2014/0324291A1) in view of Kawamoto (US 2019/0360174A1) and Takeuchi (JP2005003445A) and further in view of Usami (JP 2008180598A) and further in view of Maruoka (US 2020/0164920 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the processor (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The controller 102 may include, without limitation, a computer or processor”) is configured to cause a display device to display (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The control system 100 may include, without limitation, a controller/computer 102, a display 104… The control system 100 will also allow the operator to configure the various settings of the sensor system 20 and monitor GNSS signal reception”).
Jones in view of Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami may not explicitly disclose the display
that the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode have been switched.
However, Maruoka discloses a display that the first calculation mode and the second
calculation mode have been switched (see at least para. [0057] of Maruoka which discloses “The display image control unit 56 a switches the screen 26 a of the display device 26 between a normal monitoring mode and a traction assist mode. For example, when display in the traction assist mode is requested by the driver and the first icon and the second icon can be drawn with sufficient drawing accuracy, a dedicated display region is formed on the screen 26 a such that the first icon and the second icon can be easily viewed”, *Examiner interprets this passage as teaching a switch between modes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to further modify the display of Jones, as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami to display that the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode have been switched, as taught in Maruoka with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the informational output of the operator display to indicate a switch between modes while controlling the display of indicators. See para. [0057] of Maruoka for motivation.
Regarding claim 20, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
displaying, on a display device (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The control system 100 may include, without limitation, a controller/computer 102, a display 104… The control system 100 will also allow the operator to configure the various settings of the sensor system 20 and monitor GNSS signal reception”).
Jones in view of Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami may not explicitly disclose the displaying
that the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode have been switched.
However, Maruoka discloses displaying that the first calculation mode and the second
calculation mode have been switched (see at least para. [0057] of Maruoka which discloses “The display image control unit 56 a switches the screen 26 a of the display device 26 between a normal monitoring mode and a traction assist mode. For example, when display in the traction assist mode is requested by the driver and the first icon and the second icon can be drawn with sufficient drawing accuracy, a dedicated display region is formed on the screen 26 a such that the first icon and the second icon can be easily viewed”, *Examiner interprets this passage as teaching a switch between modes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to further modify the display of Jones, as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami to include displaying that the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode have been switched, as taught in Maruoka with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the informational output of the operator display to indicate a switch between modes while controlling the display of indicators. See para. [0057] of Maruoka for motivation.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 2014/0324291A1) in view of Kawamoto (US 2019/0360174A1) and Takeuchi (JP2005003445A) and further in view of Usami (JP 2008180598A) and further in view of Sweeney (US 2020/0049517A1).
Regarding claim 7, Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami discloses
wherein the processor is configured to cause a display device to display (see at least para. [0092] of Jones which discloses “The control system 100 may include, without limitation, a controller/ computer 102, a display 104… The control system 100 will also allow the operator to configure the various settings of the sensor system 20 and monitor GNSS signal reception”).
Jones as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami may not explicitly disclose a display
that switching of the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode is recommended.
However, Sweeney discloses a display that switching of the first calculation mode and the
second calculation mode is recommended (see at least para. [0024] of Sweeney which discloses “when the operating parameters of the autonomous vehicle indicate that the autonomous vehicle will have difficulty traveling to the requested destination (e.g., at least compared to a non-autonomous vehicle), the feedback response can provide a suggested destination for the passenger to switch to a non-autonomous vehicle to complete travel to the requested destination” and see at least para. [0057] of Sweeney which discloses “the method can include provide the feedback response for presentation to the passenger via one or more interfaces. For instance, information associated with the feedback response can be presented in an interface on a display screen or other output device located within the autonomous vehicle”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to further modify the display of Jones, as modified by Kawamoto, Takeuchi and Usami to include a display that switching of the first calculation mode and the second calculation mode is recommended, as taught in Sweeney with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve safety, usability and operational efficiency by suggesting the that the most appropriate mode for operation/calculation is selected. See para. [0024] of Sweeney for motivation.
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Matsumoto (US 2016/0258134 A1) discloses a display device of a work vehicle according to the present invention is configured to alternatively display a plurality of display screens including a first display screen with a video display area and a second display screen without the video display area in accordance with an operation of a screen changeover switch, wherein upon switching from the first display screen to the second display screen for display, a temporary second display screen on which precaution information prompting to switch to and display the first display screen is displayed is displayed. Ishida (US 2020/0224383 A1) discloses , a satellite communication antenna (not illustrated) such as a GNSS receiver is connected to the target surface setting device 51. If an external terminal storing three-dimensional data about a target surface defined in a global coordinate system (absolute coordinate system) and an excavator can perform data communication, a target surface corresponding to the excavator position can be searched in the three-dimensional data in the external terminal and received, based on the global coordinate of the excavator identified by the satellite communication antenna.
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 DANA IVEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4896. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.
/DANA D IVEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/D.D.I/May 11, 2026
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights