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 . Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below. This action is in response to the claims filed 3/13/26.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/13/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Remarks 35 USC § 102. filed on 3/13/26, regarding 35 USC § 102 rejections are persuasive in view of amendments filed 3/13/26.
However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of Varadarajan et al. (US 2024/0168480) and Cheng et al. (US 2023/0159056) below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the following:
13. (Currently Amended) The method of claim 11, wherein searching the search space for the replacement target waypoint comprises searching, starting from the invalid waypoint, in a direction perpendicular to at least a portion of the route plan at the invalid waypoint until the replacement target waypoint is found.
It is unclear as to how the replacement target waypoint is found “in a direction perpendicular to at least a portion of the route plan at the invalid waypoint”. The search is performed in a perpendicular direction starting from the invalid waypoint but also in a direction perpendicular to at least a portion of the route plan. It is unclear as to whether the search starting from the invalid waypoint must be perpendicular at that point or perpendicular to at least a portion of the route at the invalid waypoint. The search starts at the invalid waypoint and progresses perpendicular to the route at that point or possibly perpendicular to some other point in the portion of the route plan containing the invalid waypoint.
Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon et al. (US 2024/0310846) in view of Varadarajan et al. (US 2024/0168480).
Regarding claims 1, 17, and 19, Jeon discloses a navigation path generation system including a method/system/processor comprising: one or more processors to perform operations comprising (¶112):
receiving a route plan that is associated with a plurality of waypoints representing locations in a physical environment (¶57-60 and Fig. 2 – receive topology map with global path corresponding to the recited route plan that is associated with a plurality of waypoints representing locations in a physical environment);
defining, based at least on a current location of a mobile robot and a regional planning horizon defining a distance over which a regional path is to be defined, a search space that includes the route plan (¶57-60, ¶71-77, and Figs. 2 and 7 – generation an occupancy grid map corresponding to the recited search space based on topology map generated using a current location and a destination corresponding to the recited current location and a regional planning horizon defining a distance over to generate a global path corresponding to the recited a regional path which is included within the occupancy grid map);
identifying a target waypoint of the plurality of waypoints that is within the search space and between a current location of the mobile robot and an end waypoint of the route plan (¶57-60 and Fig. 2 – determining a next waypoint of the plurality of waypoints corresponding to the recited target waypoint being in a portion of the occupancy grid map corresponding to the recited search space between a current location of a mobile robot and the destination corresponding to the recited end waypoint of the route plan); and
generating a path between the current location of the mobile robot and the target waypoint (¶63 and Fig. 2 - a local path connecting a current position of the mobile computing apparatus with the next waypoint may be generated); and
causing the mobile robot to navigate to the target waypoint according to the path (¶17 - cause the traveling of the mobile robot according to the generated local path).
While Jeon does disclose an iterative path planning approach, it does not explicitly disclose expanding the search space as claimed.
However, Varadarajan discloses an autonomous navigation system including determining that a first target waypoint of the plurality of waypoints is not reachable within the search space; responsive to determining that the first target waypoint is not reachable within the search space, expanding the search space to generate an expanded search space; identifying a second target waypoint that that is within the expanded search space and between a current location of the mobile robot and an end waypoint of the route plan (¶51-54 and ¶102-110 – if all local paths to the next goal are invalid within the local planner corresponding to the recited first target waypoint is not reachable within the search space, recomputing the global path to generate a new goal corresponding to the recited second target waypoint via the global map corresponding to the recited expanded search space);
The combination of the iterative path planning approach of Jeon with the local/global map based path planning system of Varadarajan fully discloses the elements as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have combined the iterative path planning approach of Jeon with the local/global map based path planning system of Varadarajan in order to produce simplified paths that can be actuated by the robot's differential drive motors, while allowing the robot to follow a path that is as close as possible to the global path and at the same time, avoiding any local obstacles when a viable local path is feasible or selecting a new goal via the global map if not (Varadarajan - ¶109-114).
Regarding claim 2, Jeon further discloses wherein each point in the search space is within a threshold distance of the route plan (¶58 – occupancy grid corresponding to the recited search space is generated utilizing sensor data which inherently includes a sensor range from the mobile robot which is on the route therefore the sensor range corresponding to the recited threshold distance of the route plan).
Regarding claim 3, Jeon further discloses generating a discretized space that represents the search space, wherein the discretized space includes a plurality of cells representing areas of the search space (¶58 – occupancy grid map corresponding to the recited discretized space that represents the search space given that a grid map includes a plurality of cells representing areas of the search space).
Regarding claim 4, Jeon further discloses wherein each cell of the plurality of cells represents an area of the physical environment having dimensions determined by a specified resolution (¶47-50 – occupancy grid detail/size is dependent upon the data capacity of the memory of the typical mobile device corresponding to the recited dimensions determined by a specified resolution).
Regarding claim 5, Jeon further discloses wherein the discretized space includes a graph, wherein the graph includes a plurality of nodes corresponding to the plurality of cells, the graph further includes a plurality of edges, and each edge associates two nodes of the plurality of nodes (¶47-51 – occupancy grid map corresponding to the recited discretized space that represents the search space where the grid map corresponding to the recited graph including nodes and edges associated with two nodes of the plurality of nodes for creating the plurality of cells).
Regarding claim 6, Jeon further discloses wherein the discretized space uses a coordinate system in which locations are specified as longitudinal and lateral displacements along a particular route (¶10 and ¶97 - The mapping of the global path to the occupancy grid map may include converting coordinate values of a plurality of nodes of the global path into coordinate values in a coordinate system of the mobile computing apparatus where the coordinate values may be expressed in GPS coordinate values corresponding to the recited longitudinal and lateral displacements along a particular route).
Regarding claim 7, Jeon further discloses wherein the identifying the target waypoint comprises searching the search space for the target waypoint, the searching starting from the current location of the mobile robot (¶60, ¶98, and Fig. 2 – determining the next waypoint corresponding to the recited identifying the target waypoint starts from the current position of the mobile robot).
Regarding claim 8, Jeon further discloses wherein the target waypoint is within a sensing range of the mobile robot (¶98 - next waypoint/first candidate waypoint CWP2 is located farthest away from the current waypoint within the identified drivable area based on the identified drivable area utilizing sensor data in the real-time generated occupancy grid map corresponding to the recited within a sensing range of the mobile robot).
Regarding claim 9, Jeon further discloses wherein the target waypoint of the plurality of waypoints is the farthest waypoint in the plurality of waypoints from the mobile robot (¶98 – selecting the next waypoint/first candidate waypoint CWP2 which is located farthest away from the current waypoint within the identified drivable area based on the identified drivable area utilizing sensor data in the real-time generated occupancy grid map corresponding to the recited within a sensing range of the mobile robot).
Regarding claim 10, Jeon further discloses wherein the identifying the target waypoint further comprises determining whether the target waypoint is an invalid waypoint, wherein the target waypoint corresponds to a location in the physical environment, and the target waypoint is an invalid waypoint if the location is occupied (¶60 and Fig. 2 - determine whether a next waypoint corresponding to the recited target waypoint is in an un-drivable area corresponding to the recited invalid waypoint where the un-drivable areas are occupied by either an object or a non-permissible driving surface corresponding to the recited the target waypoint is an invalid waypoint if the location is occupied).
Regarding claim 11, Jeon further discloses wherein the identifying the target waypoint further comprises: in response to determining that the target waypoint is an invalid waypoint, searching the search space for a replacement target waypoint, the searching starting from the invalid waypoint (¶89-94 and Fig. 9 – when the next waypoint WP2 corresponding to the recited target waypoint is in an un-drivable area corresponding to the recited invalid waypoint, searching the occupancy grid corresponding to the recited search space along the line connecting the current location and the next waypoint WP2 for the farthest candidate waypoint corresponding to the recited starting from the invalid waypoint).
Regarding claim 12, Jeon further discloses wherein the searching the search space for the replacement target waypoint comprises searching along a path corresponding to at least a portion of the route plan (¶89-94 and Fig. 9 – when the next waypoint WP2 corresponding to the recited target waypoint is in an un-drivable area corresponding to the recited invalid waypoint, searching the occupancy grid corresponding to the recited search space along the line connecting the current location and the next waypoint WP2 for candidate waypoints corresponding to the recited replacement target waypoint along a path corresponding to the recited at least a portion of the route plan given that WP2 is originally from the global path corresponding to the recited route plan).
Regarding claim 14, Jeon further discloses wherein the generating the path between the current location of the mobile robot and the target waypoint comprises (¶63 and Fig. 2 - a local path connecting a current position of the mobile computing apparatus with the next waypoint may be generated):
searching the search space for a collision-free path between the current location of the mobile robot and the target waypoint; and determining, based on a result of searching the search space, whether the path between the current location of the mobile robot and the target waypoint exists in the search space (¶55-63 – determination of a local path to the next waypoint through drivable space corresponding to the recited determining, based on a result of searching the search space, whether the path between the current location of the mobile robot and the target waypoint exists in the search space).
Regarding claim 15, Jeon further discloses in response to the determining that a collision-free path does not exist in the search space, identifying an expanded space that is larger than the search space; and searching the expanded space for a path between the current location of the mobile robot and the target waypoint (¶101-105 and Fig. 15 – when the next waypoint corresponding to the recited target waypoint does not have a collision free path greater than a reference value, the search expands by rotating the search line by an angle until a valid path is derived corresponding to the recited expanding the search space and searching for a new path).
Regarding claim 16, Jeon further discloses in response to the determining that a collision-free path does not exist in the search space, generating a second route plan from the current location of the mobile robot to the end waypoint; and updating the search space to include at least the second route plan (¶101-105 and Fig. 15 – when the next waypoint corresponding to the recited target waypoint does not have a collision free path greater than a reference value, the search expands by rotating the search line by an angle corresponding to the recited second route plan until a valid path is derived corresponding to the recited updating the search space to include at least the second route plan).
Regarding claims 18 and 20, Jeon further discloses wherein the processor/system comprises at least one of (the “at least one of” claim elements only requires one to be present to disclose the invention as claimed):
a control system for an autonomous or semi-autonomous machine (¶91 - mobile computing apparatus for performing autonomous navigation);
a perception system for an autonomous or semi-autonomous machine (¶111 – sensors corresponding to the recited perception system);
a system for performing simulation operations (¶16 – generating a global path corresponding to the recited simulation operations);
a system for performing digital twin operations (¶53 – external computing devices capable of performing digital twin operations);
a system for performing light transport simulation (¶53 – external computing devices capable of performing light transport simulation);
a system for performing collaborative content creation for 3D assets (¶80 – LIDAR sensors create 3D models);
a system for performing deep learning operations (¶53 – external computing devices capable of performing deep learning operations);
a system implemented using an edge device (¶53 – external computing device corresponding to the recited edge device);
a system implemented using a robot (¶3);
a system for performing conversational AI operations (¶53 – external computing device corresponding to the recited edge device);
a system for performing one or more generative AI operations (¶53 – external computing device capable of performing one or more generative AI operations);
a system implementing one or more large language models (LLMs) (¶53 – external computing device implementing one or more large language models (LLMs));
a system for generating synthetic data (¶53 – external computing device capable of generating synthetic data);
a system incorporating one or more virtual machines (VMs) (¶53 – external computing device capable of incorporating one or more virtual machines (VMs));
a system implemented at least partially in a data center (¶53 – server corresponding to the recited data center); or
a system implemented at least partially using cloud computing resources (¶53 – server corresponding to the recited cloud computing).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon et al. (US 2024/0310846) in view of Varadarajan et al. (US 2024/0168480), as applied to claim 11 above, further in view of Cheng et al. (US 2023/0159056).
Regarding claim 13, Jeon further discloses wherein the searching the search space for the replacement target waypoint comprises searching (¶101-105 and Fig. 15 – candidate waypoint corresponding to the recited replacement target waypoint is derived from an angular offset from the original straight line between WP1 and WP2 where the candidate waypoint is selected from the angular shifted line corresponding to the recited searching in a direction perpendicular to the line between WP1 and WP2 corresponding to the recited at least a portion of the route plan).
While Jeon does disclose utilizing an angular offset from an invalid waypoint to find a valid waypoint, it does not explicitly disclose searching in a perpendicular direction starting from the invalid waypoint until a valid replacement target is found.
However, Cheng discloses an obstacle avoidance path planning method including starting from the invalid waypoint, in a direction perpendicular to at least a portion of the route plan at the invalid waypoint until the replacement target waypoint is found (¶95-101 - The horizontal obstacle avoidable range is a range in which obstacle avoidance can be performed in a direction perpendicular to the path in a traveling process of the ego vehicle corresponding to the recited searching in a direction perpendicular to the portion of the route plan at the invalid waypoint which is used to find new path corresponding to the recited replacement target waypoint an optimal horizontal distance from a waypoint that would have led to collision with an obstacle corresponding to the recited invalid waypoint)
The combination of the iterative path planning system of Jeon in view of Varadarajan with the optimal horizontal distance based obstacle avoidance navigation of Cheng fully discloses the elements as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have combined the iterative path planning system of Jeon in view of Varadarajan with the optimal horizontal distance based obstacle avoidance navigation of Cheng in order to enable a traveling apparatus to keep an optimal horizontal distance from the obstacle in a complex and narrow environment, and also prevent the planned obstacle avoidance path from being affected by a change in a relatively distant environment, thereby improving stability of the obstacle avoidance path (Cheng - ¶95).
Additional References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hennessy et al. (US 2012/0179322) discloses an autonomous navigation system including utilizing an expanded search space to determine a path that satisfies defined path planning constraints (¶46-49).
Agarwal et al. (US 2017/0165835) discloses a robotic motion planning system including determining a frontier region between a frontier at a current time and a frontier at a next time. Waypoints are sampled in the frontier region with a bias toward the target. A path to reach the target is selected based on a sequence of the sampled waypoints (Abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew J Reda whose telephone number is (408)918-7573. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7-4 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW J. REDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights