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 action is responsive to applicant’s initial filing of 3/14/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected.
Priority
Applicant’s claim of priority to application 63/452631 filed 3/16/2022 is acknowledged.
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 18 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. As the camera is secured to a moveable camera assembly, it is not apparent whether the claim is directed at determining an object position in a second position of the camera or any field of view captured by the second camera (Cl 18 L 2-3).
As applicant is claiming both a camera with multiple positions via its movable camera assembly -hence inherently at least one position is a second position- and as applicant is also claiming a second camera having a field of view, it creates plural plausible distinct interpretations of the final “second” in the claim.
If intending for “second” to refer to the second camera field of view, consider:
the second camera to determine in a second camera field of view the position of an object.
If intending for “second” to refer to a second position of the camera, consider:
the second camera to determine from a second position of the second camera the position of an object in a second camera field of view.
For prior art purposes, the claim has presently been interpreted with the final second referring to the field of view as second is closer to field of view than position.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Patterson et al. ‘951 (EP3718951) which discloses all the claimed elements including:
(re: cl 13) A method (#400) of dropping off a load (¶38-“FIG. 10 illustrates a method 400 for dropping off a load onto a rack or raised platform using the MHV 60 with the load handling module 100") supported by a material handling vehicle (#60), comprising:
guiding, via a controller (#150), the material handling vehicle (#60) to a drop-off
location provided by a warehouse management system to the controller (#304 fig. 8, #404 fig 9; ¶38: load drop-off coordinates (e.g., an X-Y position and height of a drop-off location) may be provided wirelessly to the controller #150 from, for example, a WMS at step #404. Accordingly, the MHV #60 may travel autonomously to the X-Y position of the drop-off location.");
determining, via at least a second (in the absence of a first camera, the phrase
"at least a second" does not require that there are two cameras) camera (#108)
mounted to the material handling vehicle (#60) via a moveable camera assembly, whether the drop-off location is vacant using at least the second camera (#104; ¶25-“or example, a space in a rack or a space on the floor”; ¶39-“at least one of the first camera 104, the second camera 108, and any other object detection system may be used to determine if the drop-off location on the rack is vacant."; ¶35-“the controller 150 may check at least one fork tip sensor 136 in order to confirm that the space in front of the forks 74 is vacant (i.e., no object detected) at step 320. After it is determined that the space in front of the forks 74 is vacant,”; ¶39-“As the forks 714 are lowered to the predefined offset above the drop-off height, the fork tip sensor(s) 128 can indicate whether the location on the rack is vacant and able to receive a load. In some embodiments, at least one of the first camera 104, the second camera 108, and any other object detection system may be used to determine if the drop-off location on the rack is vacant.”)
extending a fork (#74) secured to the material handling vehicle (#60) towards the
load to position the load within the drop-off location (¶43-“the forks 74 may traverse (i.e., extend) into the rack to place the load at step 448.");
determining, via a fork position sensor (#128/#142 ;¶31-“the controller 150 can monitor at least one of the load seated sensor(s) 142, the pallet center stringer (using, for example, the first camera 104), and the fork tip sensor(s) 128 to check that the forks 74 are traversing properly into the pallet pockets. Additionally or alternatively, the controller 140 many monitor and/or measure a distance travelled by the forks 74.") secured to the material handling vehicle
(#142 and #128 are both secured to the vehicle via the forks and the backrest), that the fork (#74) is in an extended position (¶44-“If the forks 74 have traversed into the rack a predetermined distance, then the extension of the forks 74 may be stopped ");
sensing, via a load beam sensor (#128) secured to the material handling vehicle
(#128 is on the vehicle #60 fig. 1/2/3) adjacent the fork position sensor (#142 - #128 fig 1), that a load beam of the drop-off location is within a predetermined proximity of the load (¶42- "More specifically, the fork tip sensor(s) 128 may be configured to detect when a load beam in
the tip sensor FOV 132, and when the forks 74 are above the load beam and the tip sensor FOV 132 is clear.");
lowering the fork (#74) to place the load within the drop-off location when the fork
position sensor determines that the fork (#74) is in an extended position and the
load beam sensor senses the load beam is within the predetermined proximity of the load (¶44-“if the forks 74 remain unblocked and have traversed into the rack a predetermined distance, “then the extension of the forks 74 may be stopped, and the forks 74 may be lowered a predefined distanced at step 456,");
and retracting the fork (#74) to disengage the load (¶44-“the forks 74 may be retracted back toward the retracted position (i.e., out of the rack and toward the vehicle body) at step 468.").
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) 1-6, 8, 10-11, 16, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patterson et al. ‘951(EP3718951) in view of Kunzig et al. (WO 2012/068353) wherein Patterson et al. ‘951 teaches:
(re: cl 1) A material handling vehicle (#60), comprising:
a vehicle body, a mast (#72), and at least one fork (#74) extending from a
load backrest (#78 fig 1) to a tip end (#80), the at least one fork (#74) being selectively movable relative to the vehicle body (¶16-"the fork assembly 70 may be movably coupled to the MHV 60 such that the fork assembly 70 can selectively translate, rotate, or a combination thereof, in at least one direction relative to the MHV 60. ") and configured to support a load (¶16-“and at least one load supporting member”);
a first camera (#104) secured to the load backrest (¶17-"The load handling
module 100 can include a first camera 104 mounted to the load backrest 78,") and positioned proximate a top surface of the at least one fork (¶17-“Generally, the first camera 104 may be positioned slightly above a top surface 84 of the forks 74. For example, the first camera 104 may be positioned so that a lower surface thereof is substantially coplanar with the top surface 84 of the forks 74."), the first camera (#104) to determine a position of an object in a first camera field of view (#116; ¶14-“With the cameras and sensors, the load handling module can obtain information about the position and orientation of the load and the space around the MHV, and then use the collected information to pick-up or drop-off the load.”);
a second camera (#108) secured to a moveable camera assembly (¶25-"a second camera 508 of the load handling module 500 may be included in (or on) a tower 512 mounted on the load backrest 78. The tower 512 may further include an actuator 560 coupled to a movable section 564 of the tower 512. "),
the second camera to determine the position of an object in a second camera field of view (#120; ¶19-“the second FOV view 120 may extend above, beyond, or otherwise past the load 90 so that the second camera 108 may view at least a portion of the load 90 and an area above the load 90.");
a fork position sensor (#128-¶31) the fork position sensor to determine whether the forks are in an extended position or a retracted position (¶31-“ the controller 140 many monitor and/or measure a distance traveled by the forks 74”);
and a controller (#150) in communication with the first camera (#104), the second
camera (#108), and the fork position sensor (#602),
the controller (#150) to control movement of the at least one fork (#74) based on information from the first camera (#104), the second camera (#108), and the fork position
sensor (#602; ¶31-“While the forks 74 are traversing into the pallet pockets, the controller 150 may monitor the progress of the traversing forks 74 in step 244; the controller 140 many monitor and/or measure a distance” ; ¶46-"the controller 150 may compare a distance traversed by the forks 74 (as measured by using another method or sensor)") secured to the mast, the fork position sensor to determine whether the forks (#74) are in an extended position or a retracted position).
Kunzig et al. teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 lacks including:
The fork position sensor secured to the mast (¶113-“fork extension sensor 17x”; 17x fig. 2a/fig 2b/fig. 4A/4b; ¶113-sensor mounted on mast).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to have the fork position extension sensor secured to the mast because the mast is proximate the vehicle load center and ascertaining the fork and load position can provide information on providing whether the load is positioned for stable forklift travel on the fork is properly positioned for picking up and dropping of the loads (¶167-“the vehicle 6 can only support and safely transport a load 1000 if the load is properly positioned on the load handling mechanism 11 (FIG. 2);” as taught by Kunzig et al..
Patterson et al. ‘951 further teaches:
(re: cl 2) the first camera field of view (#116) covers at least a portion of a bottom of the load (#604) when the load (#604) is supported on the at least one fork (#74 fig. 4).
(re: cl 3) the second camera field of view (#120) covers at least a portion of a top of the load (#604) when the load (#604) is supported on the at least one fork (#74; ¶18-the second FOV view 120 may extend above, beyond, or otherwise past the load 90 so that the second camera 108 may view at least a portion of the load 90 and an area above the load 90."; view visible in fig. 4).
(re: cl 4) the second camera field of view (#120) covers at least a portion of a bottom of the load (#604) when the load (#604) is supported on the at least one fork (#74; ¶28- the 2nd camera is rotatable and height adjustable, and it is mentioned that it can be oriented "towards the fork"; ¶26-“an actuator may be configured to pivot, rotate, or translate the second camera 508 relative to the tower 512 and/or the moveable section 564” that it can be oriented "towards the fork"; ¶18-"Further, the second camera 108 may be positioned so that the second FOV 120 is generally angled toward the forks 74.").
(re: cl 5) wherein the second camera (#108) is movable between a first position and a second position based on a location of the forks (#74; ¶25-"a second camera 508 of the load handling module 500 may be included in (or on) a tower 512 mounted on the load backrest 78. The tower 512 may further include an actuator 560 coupled to a movable section 564 of the tower 512. "; ¶25-“ actuator may be configured to pivot, rotate, or translate the second camera 508 relative to the tower 512 and/or the moveable section 564.”).
(re: cl 6) in the first position, the second camera (#108) is positioned vertically above the first camera (#104; #108 over #104 fig. 7).
(re: cl 8) a fork tip sensor (#128) secured to the at least one fork proximate a tip end (#80), the fork tip sensor (#128) to detect a presence of an object within a fork sensor field of view extending in front of the tip end (#80; ¶21-"fork tip sensor 128 may be configured to detect the presence or absence of an object within a tip sensor FOV 132 (see, e.g., FIG. 3), which may extend from the fork tip sensor 128 in a direction away from the load backrest 78").
(re: cl 10) further comprising: a load beam sensor mounted adjacent the fork position sensor; (¶40-41 load beam sensed from cameras on mast; ¶42- "More specifically, the fork tip sensor(s) 128 may be configured to detect when a load beam in the tip sensor FOV 132, and when the forks 74 are above the load beam and the tip sensor FOV 132 is clear.");
wherein the load beam sensor indicates to the controller that a load handling operation of the material handling vehicle is complete (¶44-load beam sensor determines weight drops as load is dropped off; ¶42-senses when load on fork has moved above the load beam offset).
(re: cl 11) wherein the load beam sensor indicates that the load handling operation is complete upon sensing a load beam of a storage device (¶44-load beam sensor determines height drop met and weight drops as load is dropped off; ¶44-“if the forks 74 remain unblocked and have traversed into the rack a predetermined distance, “then the extension of the forks 74 may be stopped, and the forks 74 may be lowered a predefined distanced at step 456").
Patterson et al. ‘951 teaches
(re: cl 16) A material handling vehicle, comprising: a vehicle body #60, a mast #72, and at least one fork #74 extending from a load backrest (#78 fig. 1) to a tip end (#80), the at least one fork being selectively movable relative to the vehicle body and configured to support a load (¶16-"the fork assembly 70 may be movably coupled to the MHV 60 such that the fork assembly 70 can selectively translate, rotate, or a combination thereof, in at least one direction relative to the MHV 60.");
a first camera (#104) secured to the load backrest (¶17-"The load handling
module 100 can include a first camera 104 mounted to the load backrest 78,") and positioned proximate a top surface of the at least one fork (¶17-“Generally, the first camera 104 may be positioned slightly above a top surface 84 of the forks 74. For example, the first camera 104 may be positioned so that a lower surface thereof is substantially coplanar with the top surface 84 of the forks 74."),
the first camera #104 to determine a position of an object in a first camera field of view (#116; ¶14-“With the cameras and sensors, the load handling module can obtain information about the position and orientation of the load and the space around the MHV, and then use the collected information to pick-up or drop-off the load.”);
the fork position sensor to determine whether the forks are in an extended position or a retracted position (#602; ¶31-“While the forks 74 are traversing into the pallet pockets, the controller 150 may monitor the progress of the traversing forks 74 in step 244; the controller 140 many monitor and/or measure a distance” ; ¶46-"the controller 150 may compare a distance traversed by the forks 74 (as measured by using another method or sensor)") secured to the mast, the fork position sensor to determine whether the forks (#74) are in an extended position or a retracted position;
and a load beam sensor mounted adjacent the fork position sensor (¶40-41 load beam sensed from cameras on mast; ¶42- "More specifically, the fork tip sensor(s) 128 may be configured to detect when a load beam in the tip sensor FOV 132, and when the forks 74 are above the load beam and the tip sensor FOV 132 is clear."),
the load beam sensor to indicate to a controller that a load handling operation of the material handling vehicle is complete (¶44-load beam sensor determines height drop met and weight drops as load is dropped off; ¶44-“if the forks 74 remain unblocked and have traversed into the rack a predetermined distance, “then the extension of the forks 74 may be stopped, and the forks 74 may be lowered a predefined distanced at step 456").
Kunzig et al. teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 lacks including:
a fork position sensor secured to the mast, (“fork extension sensor 17x”; 17x fig. 2a ; fig 2b/fig. 4A/4b ; ¶113-sensor mounted on mast).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to have the fork position extension sensor secured to the mast because the mast is proximate the vehicle load center and ascertaining the fork and load position can provide information on providing whether the load is positioned for stable forklift travel on the fork is properly positioned for picking up and dropping of the loads (¶167-“ the vehicle 6 can only support and safely transport a load 1000 if the load is properly positioned on the load handling mechanism 11 (FIG. 2);” as taught by Kunzig et al.).
Patterson et al. ‘951 further teaches:
(re: cl 18) further comprising: a second camera secured to a moveable camera assembly, the second camera to determine the position of an object in a second camera field of view (#74; ¶25-“ actuator may be configured to pivot, rotate, or translate the second camera 508 relative to the tower 512 and/or the moveable section 564.”; ¶28- the 2nd camera is rotatable and height adjustable, and it is mentioned that it can be oriented "towards the fork"; ¶26-“an actuator may be configured to pivot, rotate, or translate the second camera 508 relative to the tower 512 and/or the moveable section 564” that it can be oriented "towards the fork"; ¶18-"Further, the second camera 108 may be positioned so that the second FOV 120 is generally angled toward the forks 74."; ¶25-second camera adjusts to see top of load ; ¶28-second camera determines if load is on ground or rack; ¶29-identifies pallet under load; ¶41-identifies features on rack 42-verifies if load will fit in volume of interest 47-captures image of load ).
(re: cl 19) wherein the second camera (#108) is movable between a first position and a second position based on a location of the forks (#74; ¶25-"a second camera 508 of the load handling module 500 may be included in (or on) a tower 512 mounted on the load backrest 78. The tower 512 may further include an actuator 560 coupled to a movable section 564 of the tower 512."; ¶25-second camera moves if load on top of forks obstructs camera FOV).
Claim(s) 7, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patterson et al. ‘951 (EP3718951) in view of Kunzig et al. (WO 2012/068353) in further view of Ichijo (EP1361190), wherein Patterson et al. ‘951 teaches the elements previously discussed and further teaches:
(re: cl 7) first camera at fork level (#104 at fork level, ¶17-“ first camera 104 may be positioned so that the lower surface thereof is above the top surface 84 of the forks 74, such as, e.g., at least one centimeter (“cm”). In some embodiments, the first camera 104 may be positioned so that the lower surface thereof is between one and eighty cms above the top surface 84 of the forks 74,”).
Ichijo teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 may lack including:
(re: cl 7) in the second position, the second camera is positioned vertically below the first camera
(¶146 rotational camera assembly moves camera #26A between position above for transport- position C Fig. 21-, camera #26A adjacent fork for load pickup A Fig. 21, camera #26A below for forks depositing in position B Fig. 21).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to move a second camera to a second position below a first camera to have a better view showing the intended dropoff location and make sure the dropoff location is clear and can accept the load as taught by Ichijo.
Patterson further teaches:
(re: cl 20) wherein, in the first position, the second camera (#108) is positioned vertically above the first camera (#104; #108 over #104 fig. 7 with #104 at fork level, 17-“first camera 104 may be positioned so that the lower surface thereof is above the top surface 84 of the forks 74, such as, e.g., at least one centimeter (“cm”). In some embodiments, the first camera 104 may be positioned so that the lower surface thereof is between one and eighty cms above the top surface 84 of the forks 74,”).
Ichijo teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951may lack including:
and wherein, in the second position, the second camera is positioned vertically below the first camera (¶146 rotational camera assembly moves camera #26A between position above for transport- position C Fig. 21-, camera #26A adjacent fork for load pickup A Fig. 21, camera #26A below for forks depositing in position B Fig. 21).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to move a second camera to a second position below a first camera to have a better view showing the intended dropoff location and make sure the dropoff location is clear and can accept the load as taught by Ichijo.
Claim(s) 9, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patterson et al. ‘951(EP3718951) in view of Kunzig et al. (WO 2012/068353) in further view of
Someya (US20100312393) wherein Patterson et al. ‘951 teaches the elements previously discussed and Someya teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 lacks including:
(re: cl 9) further comprising: an accelerometer in electrical communication with the controller (¶27-“The velocity sensor 3 detects acceleration and determines the velocity from the integral of the acceleration.”);
wherein the accelerometer determines an oscillation frequency of the mast (¶27-“The velocity sensor 3 detects acceleration and determines the velocity from the integral of the acceleration of the acceleration” of the robot arm which is analogous to the mast of the fork lift.”; ¶58-“Therefore, if the acceleration can be measured, it is an effective method to feedback the measured acceleration and to use the resultant for controlling the timing of releasing the shutter.”);
and wherein the controller delays imaging via the first or second camera based on input from the accelerometer (¶60-“The shutter is released after time t6 when being below all the three kinds of threshold values. Similarly to the determination as to whether the position threshold value and the velocity threshold value have been reached, the determination as to whether the acceleration threshold value has been reached is performed by the control portion 10, which issues the imaging instruction to release the shutter via the image processing portion 9.”; ¶61-“earliest shutter chance is time t6 which is indicated by a small circle at the head of the black band.“; shutter released at t6 when damping has reduced measured oscillation to an absolute value of less than delta a1 or delta a2 as seen in Fig. 5).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to use an accelerometer to measure oscillation frequency and delay imaging premised upon accelerometer measurements to assure no blur of camera and sensors due vibration and avoid minimize dumping loads due excess oscillations as taught by Someya.
Someya teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 lacks including:
(re: cl 17) further comprising: an accelerometer in electrical communication with the controller (¶27-“The velocity sensor 3 detects acceleration and determines the velocity from the integral of the acceleration.”);
wherein the accelerometer determines an oscillation frequency of the forks (¶27-“. The velocity sensor 3 detects acceleration and determines the velocity from the integral of the acceleration of the acceleration” of the robot arm which is analogous to the forks of the fork lift.”; ¶58-“Therefore, if the acceleration can be measured, it is an effective method to feedback the measured acceleration and to use the resultant for controlling the timing of releasing the shutter.”);
and wherein the controller delays imaging via the first or second camera based on input from the accelerometer (¶60-“The shutter is released after time t6 when being below all the three kinds of threshold values. Similarly to the determination as to whether the position threshold value and the velocity threshold value have been reached, the determination as to whether the acceleration threshold value has been reached is performed by the control portion 10, which issues the imaging instruction to release the shutter via the image processing portion 9.”; ¶61-“earliest shutter chance is time t6 which is indicated by a small circle at the head of the black band.“; shutter released at t6 when damping has reduced measured oscillation to an absolute value of less than delta a1 or delta a2 as seen in Fig. 5).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to use an accelerometer to measure oscillation frequency and delay imaging premised upon accelerometer measurements to assure no blur of camera and sensors due vibration and avoid minimize dumping loads due excess oscillations as taught by Someya.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patterson et al. ‘951(EP3718951) in view of Kunzig et al. (WO 2012/068353) in further view of Morikawa (JP2019147649A), with citations per the machine translation, wherein Patterson et al. ‘951 teaches the elements previously discussed and
Morikawa teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 lacks including:
(re: cl 12) further comprising: a timer in electrical communication with the controller (¶130-shaking timer);
wherein the timer begins a settle time countdown upon each stop of movement of the material handling vehicle (¶130-“ referring to the shaking timer, if the predetermined time Δt2 is exceeded, it is determined that the current deviation is not shaking at this time,”);
and wherein the controller delays imaging via the first or second cameras until after the timer has ended (¶20-load movement determination performed after vibration settling time exceeded).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to have a settle time timer and defer imaging till the interval has expired assure no blur of camera and sensors due vibration and avoid minimize dumping loads due excess oscillations (¶38-“ The load movement on the loading platform can be determined more accurately, and the movement operation can be accurately controlled to prevent the collapse of the load and the disaster caused by the collapse of the load.”) as taught by Morikawa.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patterson et al. ‘951 (EP3718951) in view of Someya (US20100312393) wherein Patterson et al. ‘951 teaches the elements previously discussed and Someya teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 lacks including:
(re: cl 14) delaying imaging via the second camera base on an input from an accelerometer in electrical communication with the controller (¶27-“The velocity sensor 3 detects acceleration and determines the velocity from the integral of the acceleration.”; ¶58-“Therefore, if the acceleration can be measured, it is an effective method to feedback the measured acceleration and to use the resultant for controlling the timing of releasing the shutter.”);
wherein the accelerometer determines an oscillation frequency of a mast of the material handling vehicle (¶60-“The shutter is released after time t6 when being below all the three kinds of threshold values. Similarly to the determination as to whether the position threshold value and the velocity threshold value have been reached, the determination as to whether the acceleration threshold value has been reached is performed by the control portion 10, which issues the imaging instruction to release the shutter via the image processing portion 9.”; ¶61-“earliest shutter chance is time t6 which is indicated by a small circle at the head of the black band.“; Released at t6 when damping has reduced measured oscillation to an absolute value of less than delta a1 or delta a2 as seen in Fig. 5).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to use an accelerometer to measure oscillation frequency and delay imaging premised upon accelerometer measurements to assure no blur of camera and sensors due vibration and avoid minimize dumping loads due excess oscillations as taught by Someya.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patterson et al. ‘951 (EP3718951) in view of Morikawa (JP2019147649A), with citations per the machine translation, wherein Patterson et al. ‘951 teaches the elements previously discussed and
Morikawa teaches any elements Patterson et al. ‘951 lacks including:
(re: cl 15) further comprising: beginning a settle time countdown upon each stop of movement of the material handling vehicle (¶130-“ referring to the shaking timer, if the predetermined time Δt2 is exceeded, it is determined that the current deviation is not shaking at this time,”);
and delaying imaging via the second camera until after the settle time countdown has elapsed (¶20-load movement determination performed after vibration settling time exceeded).
It 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, for Patterson et al. ‘951 to have a settle time timer and defer imaging till the interval has expired assure no blur of camera and sensors due vibration and avoid minimize dumping loads due excess oscillations (38-“The load movement on the loading platform can be determined more accurately, and the movement operation can be accurately controlled to prevent the collapse of the load and the disaster caused by the collapse of the load.”) as taught by Morikawa.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL E BUTLER whose telephone number is (571)272-6937.
The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached on 571-270-3415. 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.
/M.E.B/Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/JACOB S. SCOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights