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
This office action is in regard to application # 18/603,450 that was filed on 03/13/2024. Claims 1-22 are currently pending and are under examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-11,13-16, and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fabio (EP3470879) (see attached English translation).
Regarding Claim 1, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) configured in the environment of the machine are monitored for protected field intrusions by at least one optoelectronic sensor (10, Fig. 1) and, on a protected field intrusion, a safe output signal (36, para. [0040]-[0041]) is generated at a safe output that is associated with the protected field, wherein the protected fields are configured such that a vehicle (52, Fig. 10) approaching the machine results in a different sequence of protected field intrusions than a person (46, Fig. 10) approaching the machine and the sequence of protected field intrusions is evaluated to distinguish a vehicle and a person from one another (para. [0070]-[0071]), wherein the optoelectronic sensor monitors three-dimensional protected fields; wherein the protected fields have at least two layers(Figs. 8–10, 42 1–5xA–H), having a lower layer and an upper layer arranged thereabove (Fabio teaches/discloses free configuration multiple simultaneous field that subdivide the monitored area with respect to different coordinates(radio/ angular or Cartesian), With groups of fields that can be arranged at different heights/ distances and with different geometries, overlaps, gaps and partial fields (Figs. 3-10); and wherein the configuration of the protected fields in the lower layer differs from the configuration of the protected fields in the upper layer(different measures are taken depending on the region in which an intrusion is detected (claims 1-14)).
Regarding Claim 2, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the machine is safeguarded on a recognition of a person approaching the machine (para. [0010], para. [0019] ; Safety reaction on person detection; ignore/ permitted objects).
Regarding Claim 3, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein only two protected fields are monitored (para. [0010]; para. [0028]; monitoring of a first number of fields; two is a disclosed/ obvious minimum).
Regarding Claim 4, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the only two protected fields are monitored that have partial protected fields (para. [0014], overlapping/ partial fields and gaps that create partial segments; Figs. 3-6)
Regarding Claim 6, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the protected fields are configured such that on an approach of an object in the lower layer, initially a different protected field is first infringed than in the upper layer (para. [0018], [0072], Figs. 3-8; discussed differing layer configurations and sequence evaluations).
Regarding Claim 7, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein only one protected field is configured in the upper layer (implicit: subset of the free multi-field configuration, Fig. 3-8).
Regarding Claim 8, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the only one protected field is configured in the upper layer without partial protected fields (same free configuration; non-overlapping single field is the classic case retained as an auction, Fig. 3-8).
Regarding Claim 9, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein two protected fields or partial protected fields of the two protected fields are configured in the lower layer such that the two protected fields or partial protected fields alternate with one another in a direction of an approach to the machine (para. [0018], [0072]; sequence monitoring; strip/rectangle fields, Figs 3-8).
Regarding Claim 10, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the alternating protected fields or partial protected fields partially overlap one another and/or a respective free zone being arranged between the alternating protected fields or partial protected fields (explicit overlaps and gaps/free zones, Figs. 3-8).
Regarding Claim 11, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein a plurality of protected fields or partial protected fields are configured in a direction transversely to a direction of an approach of the machine in the lower layer (coordinate group subdivision, Figs. 3-8).
Regarding Claim 13, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein a direction of movement is determined from the sequence of protected field intrusions (para. [0018], Figs. 3-8)
Regarding Claim 14, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein a counter is provided, and a position is determined from a status of the counter (para. [0011]; sequence counter, para. [0019]).
Regarding Claim 15, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the counter is counted up and down on a protected field intrusion or on an ending protected field intrusion corresponding to the direction of movement (i.e. direct implementation of sequence counter; para. [0011], [0019]).
Regarding Claim 16, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the protected fields are displaced along a direction of approach to the machine after a protected field intrusion in the lower layer (dynamic adaptation/sequential evaluation and field configuration, para. [0016]-[0017], [0021], Figs. 3-8).
Regarding Claim 18, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein an object specific reactions based on the evaluated sequence of field intrusions. Once an object has been characterized(including recognition that the object is a vehicle/car rather than a person) and has reached a position corresponding “at the machine”, the system can change the active protective field configuration and associate safety reactions. The purpose of the sensor is machine safeguarding. Therefore, the new configuration continued to protect the machine. Fabio further teaches certain objects treated as permitted while others remain prohibited, which directly supports the configurations that blocks additional vehicles once one vehicle is already present (para. [0004], para. [0013], Figs. 3-5)).
Regarding Claim 19, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein sequence monitoring of successive field violations and subsequent field clearances in order to track an object’s complete path, including its departure. When the sequence indicates that the (person or vehicle) has left the monitored zone and no further intrusion remains, the system can resume normal machine operation rather than requiring a permanent emergency stop. Automatic restart upon confirmation that the zone is clear after complete departure sequence is therefore disclosed (para. [0004], para. [0010]).
Regarding Claim 20, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the monitoring fields are freely configurable in three dimensions and(the 3D camera or multi plane lather scanner) maybe used (para. [0022]). The fields can be subdivided with respect to different spatial coordinates, including height related layers and their geometries are chosen according to the expected objects and the safety task. Adaptations of the vertical extent(height) of a lower layer field to the expected height profile of a vehicle, or to the known load state that changes that height profile, is therefore within the disclosed free configuration (para. [0013]).
Regarding Claim 21, the device of claim 21 is rejected under the same rationale as the rejection of the method claim 1 above. The controller connected to the sensor is expressly described para. [0021] of the Fabio reference.
Regarding Claim 22, Fabio discloses a monitoring device wherein the at least one safe optoelectronic sensor is a 3D camera (para. [0022]).
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 12, and 17-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fabio (EP3470879) (see attached English translation).
Regarding Claim 1, In alternative, to the extent any difference in explicit “vehicle vs. person sequence” language or exact” lower/ upper layer” terminologies are argued, claim one nevertheless obvious over Fabio. A person of ordinary skill in and the art of machine safety Optoelectronics before the effective filing date of the invention, faced with Fabio’s Teaching of simultaneous multifield monitoring, sequence evaluation for object characterization and movement, and 3D sensing, would have found it obvious to configure different lower and upper layer field geometry saw the distinct/width profiles of vehicle versus persons produce distinguishable intrusion sequence with great expectation of success to avoid unnecessary machine stoppage while still safeguarding persons, and to distinguish permitted objects (vehicles) from persons. No unexpected results are obtained.
Regarding Claim 2, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the machine is safeguarded on a recognition of a person approaching the machine (para. [0010], para. [0019] ; Safety reaction on person detection; ignore/ permitted objects).
Regarding Claim 3, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein only two protected fields are monitored (para. [0010]; para. [0028]; monitoring of a first number of fields; two is a disclosed/ obvious minimum).
Regarding Claim 4, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the only two protected fields are monitored that have partial protected fields (para. [0014], overlapping/ partial fields and gaps that create partial segments; Figs. 3-6).
Regarding Claim 5, Fabio discloses (para. [0013], [0028]) the claimed invention except for two protected fields monitored by a respective one separate optoelectronic sensor (i.e. multiple senor). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use multiple sensors or sensors for each protected fields, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding Claim 7, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein only one protected field is configured in the upper layer (implicit: obvious subset of the free multi-field configuration, Fig. 3-8).
Regarding Claim 8, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the only one protected field is configured in the upper layer without partial protected fields (same free configuration; non-overlapping single field is the classic case retained as an option, Fig. 3-8).
Regarding Claim 12, Fabio discloses the claimed invention except the least one free zone between the protected fields or partially protected fields of the protected fields of the protected fields of the lower layer is so small in its lateral extent that a lying or crawling person does not fully have space therein. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the least one free zone between the protected fields or partial protected fields of the protected fields of the lower layer so small in its lateral extent that a lying or crawling person does not fully have space therein, since applicant has not disclosed that making the least one free zone between the protected fields or partially protected fields of the protected fields of the protected fields of the lower layer so small in its lateral extent that a lying or crawling person does not fully have space therein solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with Fabio’s configuration and safety design and person-protection purposes (para. [0019])
Regarding Claim 17, Fabio discloses that protected/monitoring fields are freely configurable and can be Adapted dynamically in response to detected intrusions and sequences. After a lower layer intrusion is detected and evaluated as part of a sequence, the system continues to monitor subsequent fields and can switch the active set of fields or their special arrangement to track the continuing movement of the object. The fields themselves may be arranged with offsets overlaps, gaps or successive strip/ rectangle geometries along the direction of approach (Fig. 3-8). A switchover to an offset arrangement is therefore disclosed. Once an intrusion occurs in a(lower layer) field, The evaluation unit us the sequence information to select or activate a subsequent configuration in which the remaining fields are specially off relative to the first configuration so continued tracking as possible. Even if the precise phrase” a switch over to protected field configuration with an offset arrangement” is not identical, The claim is obvious Fabio. A person of ordinary skill in the art of machine safety optoelectronics, reading Fabio’s teaching of simultaneous multi-field monitoring, sequence evaluation for movement tracking, and free special configuration of the fields before the effective filing date of the invention, would have found it obvious to implement the displacement of claim 16 by switching one offset field set to obtain finer resolution of object path and direction after the initial intrusion while continuing to generate appropriate safe outputs. No unexpected results exist.
Regarding Claim 18, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein an object specific reactions based on the evaluated sequence of field intrusions. Once an object has been characterized(including recognition that the object is a vehicle/car rather than a person) and has reached a position corresponding “at the machine”, the system can change the active protective field configuration and associate safety reactions. The purpose of the sensor is machine safeguarding. Therefore, the new configuration continued to protect the machine. Fabio further teaches certain objects treated as permitted while others remain prohibited, which directly supports the configurations that blocks additional vehicles once one vehicle is already present (para. [0004], para. [0013], Figs. 3-5)).
Regarding Claim 19, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein sequence monitoring of successive field violations and subsequent field clearances in order to track an object’s complete path, including its departure. When the sequence indicates that the (person or vehicle) has left the monitored zone and no further intrusion remains, the system can resume normal machine operation rather than requiring a permanent emergency stop. Automatic restart upon confirmation that the zone is clear after complete departure sequence is therefore disclosed (para. [0004], para. [0010]).
Regarding Claim 20, Fabio discloses a method of a contactless safeguarding of a machine in which a plurality of protected fields (40, 42, Fig. 3) wherein the monitoring fields are freely configurable in three dimensions and(the 3D camera or multi plane lather scanner) maybe used (para. [0022]). The fields can be subdivided with respect to different spatial coordinates, including height related layers and their geometries are chosen according to the expected objects and the safety task. Adaptations of the vertical extent(height) of a lower layer field to the expected height profile of a vehicle, or to the known load state that changes that height profile, is therefore within the disclosed free configuration (para. [0013]).
Regarding Claim 21, the device of claim 21 is rejected under the same rationale as the rejection of the method claim 1 above. The controller connected to the sensor is expressly described para. [0021] of the Fabio reference.
Regarding Claim 22, Fabio discloses a monitoring device wherein the at least one safe optoelectronic sensor is a 3D camera (para. [0022]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Plasberg et al. (US 2008/0285842) discloses an optoelectronic sensor and method for detecting an object in a three-dimensional monitored region uses a plurality of video sensors. Each sensor has a multiplicity of light-receiving elements that are configured to take a pixel picture of the monitored space, and a control unit identifies an object in the monitored space from video data of the pixel picture. Each video sensor has at least one pixel line that is formed by light-receiving elements. The video sensors are spaced from each other so that each sensor monitors an associated plane of the monitored space.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASSRES H WOLDEMARYAM whose telephone number is (571)272-6607. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
Assres H. Woldemaryam
Primary Examiner (Aeronautics and Astronautics)
Art Unit 3642
/ASSRES H WOLDEMARYAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights