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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant’s arguments, filed 1/22/2026, with respect to the amended claim(s) have been considered but, are moot due to a new grounds of rejection based upon a new reference, PARK et al. (KR 20160028740 A), see below.
PARK discloses a display unit (fig. 1, 100 and/or 50) for displaying state information of the first home appliance (10, 10-4) (i.e. a robot cleaner) (abstract) and
a display unit (100, 50) configured to display an avatar (on 300, 310-340) (400, 410-440) based on an operational mode (pgs. 8-11) and a spatial movement of the device (10) (pg. 3 activation of robotic cleaner implies spatial movement of some part thereof), wherein the displayed avatar is modifiable (430) , via an interactive display screen (100, 300, 400, 430) on which the avatar is displayed, to define at least one of a user-defined mode or a user-defined parameter for the device (10), wherein the interactive display screen (100, 300, 400, 430) is configured to select one of the operational mode and the user-defined mode (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17)
(figs. 1, and 3-4)
(abstract)
(pgs. 3, 8-11, and 17).
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.
2. Claim(s) 21-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over RAMANAND et al. (US 20160296649 A1) in view of AHN et al. (WO 2016080727 A1) and further in light of BISSET (WO 0101208 A1) and PARK et al. (KR 20160028740 A).
Regarding claim 21, RAMANAND discloses a device (figs. 1-8, 10), comprising:
a mobile carriage (14) having wheels (fig. 7, unlabeled) [0044];
a utility pod (figs. 3-5; trays 74) configured to receive an artifact [0054]; and
a cabinet (16) coupled to the utility pod (74’s), the cabinet being supported by the mobile carriage,
wherein the cabinet (16) includes a recess (in 16 for 18 and/or for 74’s) [0054] adjacent to the utility pod (74’s) [0054];
wherein the cabinet (16) further includes a display unit (fig. 3; 76) [0053] configured to display an “avatar” [0053 Note graphical interface] based on an operational mode [0053]
(figs. 1-8, 10)
[0044-0046]
[0049]
[0053 Note An LCD screen 76 … to review and interface with the operating parameters]
[0054]
[0063] [0068]
[0069-0071].
But RAMANAND fails to explicitly disclose wherein the cabinet further includes a display unit configured to display an “avatar” based on a spatial movement of the device wherein the displayed avatar is modifiable to define a user-defined parameter of the device; and wherein the interactive display screen is configured to select the user-defined mode.
AHN, however, discloses a robotic cleaner (figs. 1-3; 100) that has a display (120, 130) configured to display an “avatar [0052 Note display information] based on an operational mode [0052] and a spatial movement of the device [0052] [0045] [0051-0054]
(figs. 1-3; robot cleaner 100, has display 120, manipulation inputter 130, wheels 160)
[0045]
[0051-0054]
[0052 Note The display 120 may display information such as an operation state (cleaning mode or sleep mode) of the robot cleaner 100, information related to a cleaning process (for example, cleaning processing time, current cleaning mode (for example suction intensity)); Note cleaning mode/ suction intensity, at least, are spatially movement states of the device].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of RAMANAND, with a display on the robot to display an “avatar” based on an operational mode and a spatial movement of the device, as taught by AHN, to use as a display for user feedback to inform a user of the robot’s operation state and/or for a user interface for controlling the robot [0051-0054].
But RAMANAND as modified by AHN fails to explicitly disclose wherein the displayed display/avatar is modifiable to define a user-defined parameter of the device; and wherein the interactive display screen is configured to select the user-defined mode.
BISSET, however, discloses a robot vacuum cleaner (abstract) (fig. 1; 10) that has a display unit (figs. 1 and 3; 16) configured to display an avatar/lights (fig. 3; for 40, 50 60) based on an operational mode (pgs. 4 and 6 Note slow or fast mode) and a spatial movement of the device (pg. 6 Note fast or slow mode controls the motor speed of driving wheel motors which spatial moves parts of/the device) , wherein the displayed avatar/lights (fig. 3; for 40, 50 60) is modifiable (avatar/light 50 modifiable by user selecting either 52a or 52b) to define at least one of a user-defined mode (pgs. 4 and 6 Note slow mode (52B) or fast mode (52A)) or a user-defined parameter of the device (pg. 6 Note fast or slow mode (52A or 52B) controls the motor speed of driving wheel motors)
(abstract)
(pgs. 1-4 and 6-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of RAMANAND as modified by AHN, with wherein the displayed avatar/light is modifiable to define at least one of a user-defined mode or a user-defined parameter of the device, as taught by BISSET , to use for a user interface selection avatar/light/button for selection of a robot vacuum cleaner’s fast or slow cleaning modes.
But RAMANAND as modified by AHN and BISSET fails to explicitly disclose wherein the interactive display screen is configured to select the user-defined mode.
PARK, however discloses a display unit (fig. 1, 100 and/or 50) for displaying state information of a first home appliance/device (10, 10-4) (i.e. a robot cleaner) (abstract) and
a display unit (100, 50) configured to display an avatar (on 300, 310-340) (400, 410-440) based on an operational mode (pgs. 8-11) and a spatial movement of the device (10) (pg. 3 activation of robotic cleaner implies spatial movement of some part thereof), wherein the displayed avatar is modifiable (430) , via an interactive display screen (100, 300, 400, 430) on which the avatar is displayed, to define at least one of a user-defined mode (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17) or a user-defined parameter (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17) for the device (10), wherein the interactive display screen (100, 300, 400, 430) is configured to select one of the operational mode (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17) and the user-defined mode (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17)
(figs. 1, and 3-4)
(abstract)
(pgs. 3, 8-11, and 17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of RAMANAND as modified by AHN and BISSET, with the interactive display screen is configured to select one of the operational mode and the user-defined mode, as taught by PARK, to use for a user interface for control of an appliance (i.e. robot cleaner’s) operational modes and/or user defined modes for an improved user experience/use via tailored appliance settings/parameters/modes control.
Regarding claim 31, RAMANAND discloses a system (figs. 1-8, 10), comprising:
a mobile carriage (14) having wheels (fig. 7, unlabeled) [0044];
a utility pod (figs. 3-5; trays 74) configured to receive an artifact [0054];
a cabinet (16) coupled to the utility pod, the cabinet being supported by the mobile carriage,
wherein the cabinet (16) includes a recess (in 16 for 18 and/or for 74’s) adjacent to the utility pod;
wherein the cabinet (16) further includes a display unit (fig. 3; 76) [0053] configured to display an “avatar” [0053 Note graphical interface] based on an operational mode [0053]
a handheld device [0049] [0063] [0068] [0054] detachably mounted (at trays 74) [0054] to the cabinet.
(figs. 1-8, 10)
[0044-0046]
[0049]
[0053 Note An LCD screen 76 … to review and interface with the operating parameters]
[0054]
[0063] [0068]
[0069-0071].
But RAMANAND fails to explicitly disclose wherein the cabinet further includes a display unit configured to display an “avatar” based on a spatial movement of the device wherein the displayed avatar is modifiable to define at least one of a user-defined mode or a user-defined parameter of the device and wherein the interactive display screen is configured to select the user-defined mode.
AHN, however, discloses a robotic cleaner (figs. 1-3; 100) that has a display (120, 130) configured to display an “avatar [0052 Note display information ] based on an operational mode [0052] and a spatial movement of the device [0052] [0045] [0051-0054]
(figs. 1-3; robot cleaner 100, has display 120, manipulation inputter 130, wheels 160)
[0045]
[0051-0054]
[0052 Note The display 120 may display information such as an operation state (cleaning mode or sleep mode) of the robot cleaner 100, information related to a cleaning process (for example, cleaning processing time, current cleaning mode (for example suction intensity)); Note cleaning mode/ suction intensity, at least, are spatially movement states of the device].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of RAMANAND, with a display on the robot to display an “avatar” based on an operational mode and a spatial movement of the device, as taught by AHN, to use as a display for user feedback to inform a user of the robot’s operation state and/or for a user interface for controlling the robot [0051-0054].
But RAMANAND as modified by AHN fails to explicitly disclose wherein the displayed display/avatar is modifiable to define at least one of a user-defined mode or a user-defined parameter of the device and wherein the interactive display screen is configured to select the user-defined mode.
BISSET, however, discloses a robot vacuum cleaner (abstract) (fig. 1; 10) that has a display unit (figs. 1 and 3; 16) configured to display an avatar/lights (fig. 3; for 40, 50 60) based on an operational mode (pgs. 4 and 6 Note slow or fast mode) and a spatial movement of the device (pg. 6 Note fast or slow mode controls the motor speed of driving wheel motors which spatial moves parts of/the device) , wherein the displayed avatar/lights (fig. 3; for 40, 50 60) is modifiable (avatar/light 50 modifiable by user selecting either 52a or 52b) to define at least one of a user-defined mode (pgs. 4 and 6 Note slow mode (52B) or fast mode (52A)) or a user-defined parameter of the device (pg. 6 Note fast or slow mode (52A or 52B) controls the motor speed of driving wheel motors)
(abstract)
(pgs. 1-4 and 6-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of RAMANAND as modified by AHN, with wherein the displayed avatar/light is modifiable to define at least one of a user-defined mode or a user-defined parameter of the device, as taught by BISSET , to use for a user interface selection avatar/light/button for selection of a robot vacuum cleaner’s fast or slow cleaning modes.
But RAMANAND as modified by AHN and BISSET fails to explicitly disclose wherein the interactive display screen is configured to select the user-defined mode.
PARK, however discloses a display unit (fig. 1, 100 and/or 50) for displaying state information of a first home appliance/device (10, 10-4) (i.e. a robot cleaner) (abstract) and
a display unit (100, 50) configured to display an avatar (on 300, 310-340) (400, 410-440) based on an operational mode (pgs. 8-11) and a spatial movement of the device (10) (pg. 3 activation of robotic cleaner implies spatial movement of some part thereof), wherein the displayed avatar is modifiable (430) , via an interactive display screen (100, 300, 400, 430) on which the avatar is displayed, to define at least one of a user-defined mode (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17) or a user-defined parameter (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17) for the device (10), wherein the interactive display screen (100, 300, 400, 430) is configured to select one of the operational mode (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17) and the user-defined mode (pgs. 3, 8, 9-11, and 17)
(figs. 1, and 3-4)
(abstract)
(pgs. 3, 8-11, and 17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of RAMANAND as modified by AHN and BISSET, with the interactive display screen is configured to select one of the operational mode and the user-defined mode, as taught by PARK, to use for a user interface for control of an appliance (i.e. robot cleaner’s) operational modes and/or user defined modes for an improved user experience/use via tailored appliance settings/parameters/modes control.
Regarding claims 22 and 32, RAMANAND discloses that the recess (in 16 for 18 and/or for 74’s) is configured to receive at least one of a housing (18) and a light source (UV light 30 on/in 18 behind 33) [0046] [0054].
Regarding claims 23 and 33, RAMANAND discloses that the artifact [0054] includes at least one of a component [0054], a tool [0054], and a computing device [0054].
Regarding claims 24 and 34, RAMANAND discloses that the utility pod (figs. 3-5; trays 74) [0054] is located at least in-part external to the cabinet (16) [0054 Note various storage slots/holders located in or on the cabinet].
Regarding claims 25 and 35, RAMANAND discloses comprising another utility pod (figs. 3-5; trays 74) [0054 Note access panels, and/or storage slots and holders] having one of a shape and a size and
a control unit ((76/connected to 76) [0053] and/or (door card 80, control unit 90)) [0086] [0089-0090] [0099-0100] in communication with a light source (30) connected to the device/system,
wherein the control unit (76) (80, 90) is configured to manipulate at least one of a portion of a device including the mobile carriage [0053] or the light source (30) [0053] [0089-0090] [0099-0100] to inhibit or terminate light from the light source (30) based on at least one of
a motion being detected proximate [0086 Note door to room robot cleaner is in] to the mobile carriage [0053] [0086] [0089-0090] [0099-0100],
Regarding claims 25 and 35, RAMANAND discloses all the limitations as expressly recited in claims 25 and 35, the only difference being the storage pod’s shape and a size being different is not explicitly disclosed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to have the claimed dimensions/sizes since it is well known in the art that storage pods/compartments can be of various different shapes and sizes. Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try different shapes and dimensions/sizes, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claims 25 and 35, RAMANAND discloses all the limitations and component parts as expressly recited in the claim, but does not explicitly disclose the shape of the storage pods/compartments device (i.e., of different shapes). The shape of the device does not appear to be critical but is an obvious choice in design. The only difference is the actual shape of the device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to design the device in different shapes. Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try a pods device having a different shape, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited different shapes/dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization. Applicant has not disclosed that the different shapes/dimensions are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another dimension. Indeed, it has been held that mere dimensional limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. See, for example, In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984); In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See also MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B).
Regarding claims 26 and 36, RAMANAND discloses that the utility pod (figs. 3-5; trays 74) [0054] includes more than one opening
[0054 Note access panels, and/or storage slots and holders]
[0054 Note various storage slots/holders located in or on the cabinet].
Regarding claims 27 and 37, RAMANAND discloses: a moveable assembly (18) [0045] and a motor (26) configured to rotate the moveable assembly about at least one of a vertical axis and horizontal axis (figs. 1-2, 18) [0045].
Regarding claims 28 and 38, RAMANAND discloses that at least one of the cabinet (16) or the mobile carriage (14) includes an outer surface having a light source (18 with 30) (fig. 3; display 76) [0053].
Regarding claims 29 and 39, RAMANAND discloses that the display unit (fig. 3; display 76) [0053] is further configured to operate in communication with a remote device (abstract) (80) [0051] [0054] [0058] [0069-0071], wherein the display unit is configured to display a parameter [0053] [0069-0071] based on the operational mode [0053] [0049] [0069-0071] , and wherein the display unit (73) includes the interactive display screen [0053 Note touch screen]
[0053 Note input controls, parameters, graphical interface].
[0053 Note An LCD screen 76 … administrator to review and interface with the operating parameters]
[0071 Note virtual joystick].
Regarding claims 30 and 40, RAMANAND discloses that the operational mode is selected based on an input from a camera (50 on 32) [0049] [0069-0070] or the remote device [0049] [0069-0071].
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrew Smyth whose telephone number is 571-270-1746. The examiner can normally be reached between 9:00AM - 6:00PM; Monday thru Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Georgia Epps can be reached on (571) 272-2328. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/ANDREW SMYTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights