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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0054] (line 3) “database 106” should read “database 214”
Paragraph [0055] (line 1) “sensors module 116” should read “sensor module 118”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module in claims 1, planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle in claim 1, perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module in claim 2, and planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle and a target placement location that overlaps at least partially with the exclusion area in claim 2.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Specifically, the perception module and planning module are hardware components that may be a processor (see at least paragraphs [0024] and [0038] from Applicant’s specification as filed).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 4, 11, and 19 are 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.
Regarding claim 4, Claim 4 recites the limitation "the autonomous vehicle" in lines 2-3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as there is no prior mention of an autonomous vehicle.
Regarding claims 11 and 19, Claims 11 and 19 are rejected on similar grounds as that detailed above with respect to claim 4.
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 1-6 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zevenbergen et al. (US2019/0193629A1) in view of Taylor (US2020/0026301A1) in view of Hoofard et al. (US2020/0239242A1) in further view of Dooley et al. (US2023/0063018A1), hereinafter Zevenbergen, Taylor, Hoofard, and Dooley respectively.
Regarding claim 1, Zevenbergen teaches a system for flush placement of pallets by an autonomous forklift, comprising: a controller (see at least [0046] “As shown in FIG. 1, robotic system 100 may include processor(s) 102, data storage 104, and controller(s) 108, which together may be part of a control system 118.” and [0056] “Operations of control system 118 may be carried out by processor(s) 102. Alternatively, these operations may be carried out by controller 108, or a combination of processor(s) 102 and controller 108.”); a sensor module containing at least one sensor communicatively coupled to the controller (see at least [0046] “Robotic system 100 may also include sensor(s) 112” also see at least [0047] “Processor(s) 102 may also directly or indirectly interact with other components of robotic system 100, such as sensor(s) 112,” also see at least [0049] and Fig.1); a perception module communicatively coupled the controller, the perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module (see at least [0079] “If an obstacle is detected, obstacle detection subsystem 234 can provide one or more communications indicating obstacle detection to path-following subsystem 238. The one or more communications indicating obstacle detection can include location information about one or more positions of one or more obstacles detected by obstacle detection subsystem 234 and/or identification information about the one or more obstacles detected by obstacle detection subsystem 234.” and [0060] “Sensor(s) 112 may provide sensor data to processor(s) 102 (perhaps by way of data 107) to allow for interaction of robotic system 100 with its environment, as well as monitoring of the operation of robotic system 100...For example, sensor(s) 112 may capture data corresponding to the terrain of the environment, location and/or identity of nearby objects (e.g., pallets, environmental landmarks), which may assist with environment recognition and navigation...Sensor(s) 112 may monitor the environment in real time, and detect obstacles, elements of the terrain, weather conditions, temperature, and/or other aspects of the environment.” also see at least [0074]); a planning module communicatively coupled to the controller, the planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle (see at least [0102] “FIG. 4D illustrates threshold area 438 around pallet rack 434 and threshold area 442 around pallet 422. Threshold area 438 may be defined as an area located within threshold distance 440 of a perimeter of pallet rack 434. Similarly, threshold area 442 may be defined as an area located within threshold distance 444 of a perimeter of pallet 422. Threshold distances 440 and 444 may be referred to as object safety thresholds. In some embodiments, threshold distances 440 and 444 may be defined by a safety standard for a workspace in which robotic devices work alongside humans. In some implementations, threshold distances greater than those defined by the safety standard may be used.”), a target location that overlaps at least partially with the exclusion area (see at least [0054] “control system 118 may receive an input (e.g., from a user or from another vehicle) indicating an instruction to move a pallet from a first location of a warehouse to a second location of the warehouse.” and [0095] “Path 401 may run from (or may form part of a path running from) a starting position within the environment to target position within the environment. Path 401 may be planned around known or fixed obstacles (e.g., walls) in the environment based on kinematic and dynamic properties of vehicle 400. Path 401 may be made up of a plurality of discrete ordered positions 410, 412, 414, 416, 418, and 420 (i.e., positions 410-420). Positions 410-420 may be target positions for vehicle 400 to follow in sequence to move along path 401. Before or while causing vehicle 400 to move along path 401, the control system may analyze path 401 to determine whether any caution regions will arise as a result of vehicle 400 moving therealong, and may cause projector 408 to project indications of any of these caution regions onto the environment.” also see at least [0115]), a drive wheel communicatively coupled to the controller (see at least [0057] “Mechanical components 110 represent hardware of robotic system 100 that may enable robotic system 100 to perform physical operations. As a few examples, robotic system 100 may include physical members such...wheel(s),” and [0049] “Controller 108 may include one or more electrical circuits, units of digital logic, computer chips, and/or microprocessors that are configured to (perhaps among other tasks) interface between any combination of mechanical components 110,” also see at least [0090]); and a load-handling assembly communicatively coupled to the controller, the load-handling assembly comprising a pair of forks capable of supporting a pallet (see at least [0090] “FIG. 3B shows an autonomous fork truck, according to an example embodiment. More specifically, autonomous fork truck 360 may include forklift 362 for lifting and/or moving pallets of boxes or other larger materials.” also see at least [0094] “Vehicle 400 may be a pallet jack or fork truck having tines 402 and 404. Tines 402 and 404 may allow vehicle 400 to interact with pallets 422-432, or other storage structures, by placing the tines into slots within the pallet, thereby enabling pick-up, transportation, and drop-off of the pallet.”), wherein the controller is configured to: manipulate the drive wheel to navigate the autonomous forklift to a location in proximity to the target location (see at least [0054]-[0055] “control system 118 may receive an input (e.g., from a user or from another vehicle) indicating an instruction to move a pallet from a first location of a warehouse to a second location of the warehouse...Based on this input, control system 118 may perform operations to cause robotic system 100 to use sensors 112 to analyze the environment of the warehouse to locate the pallet and subsequently use mechanical components 110 to pick up and move the pallet.” and [0090] “Autonomous fork truck 360 may additionally include wheels 364 for locomotion to transport pallets within the warehouse.”).
Examiner interprets that a controller is encompassed at least by control system 118, processor 102, and/or controller 108, sensor module is encompassed at least by sensor(s) 112, perception module is encompassed at least by obstacle detection subsystem 234, exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle is encompassed at least by threshold area 438 and/or threshold distance 440, drive wheel is encompassed at least by wheel(s) and/or mechanical components 110, and load-handling assembly is encompassed at least by forklift 362 and/or tines 402 and 404.
Zevenbergen does not explicitly teach but suggests manipulate the load-handling assembly to place the pair of forks at the target placement height (see at least [0090] “FIG. 3B shows an autonomous fork truck, according to an example embodiment. More specifically, autonomous fork truck 360 may include forklift 362 for lifting and/or moving pallets of boxes or other larger materials. In some examples, forklift 362 may be elevated to reach different racks of a storage rack or other fixed storage structure within a warehouse.”), manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to position the pair of forks within the target placement location (see at least [0090] “FIG. 3B shows an autonomous fork truck, according to an example embodiment. More specifically, autonomous fork truck 360 may include forklift 362 for lifting and/or moving pallets of boxes or other larger materials. In some examples, forklift 362 may be elevated to reach different racks of a storage rack or other fixed storage structure within a warehouse.”), and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to retract the forks from the pallet if resistance is present (see at least 0060] “Sensor(s) 112 may provide sensor data to processor(s) 102 (perhaps by way of data 107) to allow for interaction of robotic system 100 with its environment, as well as monitoring of the operation of robotic system 100. The sensor data may be used in evaluation of various factors for activation, movement, and deactivation of mechanical components 110 and electrical components 116 by control system 118.”).
Zevenbergen does not explicitly teach a target placement, a target placement height, and determine if resistance is present against the pallet.
Taylor more explicitly teaches a perception module communicatively coupled the controller, the perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module (see at least [0093] “In some embodiments, computing device 600 can include one or more sensors 620. Sensor(s) 620 can be configured to measure conditions in an environment for computing device 600 and provide data about that environment. For example, sensor(s) 620 can include one or more of: (i) an identification sensor to identify other objects and/or devices”); and a planning module communicatively coupled to the controller, the planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle (see at least [0147] “in addition to classification, the control system may determine an orientation of the object, and determine the buffer region based on the orientation.” and [0040] “A buffer region may be placed around each of the objects identified as an obstacle. The buffer region may operate to enforce a minimum distance (i.e., a first threshold distance) away from the obstacle at which the vehicle is to stop to avoid colliding with the obstacle.”).
Examiner interprets that perception module is encompassed at least by computing device 600, planning module is encompassed at least by control system and exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle is encompassed at least by first threshold distance and/or buffer region.
Hoofard more explicitly teaches a target placement location (see at least [0088] “As described in greater detail below in reference to steps 714-724, once the AMT 300 enters the trailer 111, the truck control system 310 can identify a fork lateral position 816 (FIGS. 8G and 9F), a truck unloading position 818 (FIGS. 8I and 9H), and a pallet unloading position 820 (FIGS. 8H, 8I and 9H). The pallet unloading position 820 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will place the pallet 605. The fork lateral position 816 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will be positioned when it uses the fork boom 303 to move the fork 302 holding the pallet 605 laterally to be aligned with the pallet unloading position 820. The truck unloading position 818 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will be positioned when it uses fork boom 303 to lower the laterally positioned fork 302 to place the pallet 605 on the floor of the trailer 111 in the pallet unloading position 820. As described below, the truck control system 310 can determine these locations based on signals from the front sensors 330b and/or a record of where the AMT 300 deposited one or more previous pallets.”), wherein the controller is configured to: manipulate the drive wheel to navigate the autonomous forklift to a location in proximity to the target placement location (see at least [0061] “The truck control system 310 can generate vehicle steering and throttle commands for the drive system 322 to navigate a path of travel for the AMT 300.” and [0093] “the truck control system 310 and the workflow procedure can, at step 722, cause the drive system 322 to move the AMT 300 forward (as shown in FIGS. 8H and 9G) until the AMT 300 is in the truck unloading position 818 and the fork 302 is over the pallet unload position 820 (as shown in FIGS. 8I and 9H)” also see at least [0059] “Referring to FIGS. 3A-3C together, the AMT 300 can include a...a drive system 322 (e.g., including an electric motor or an internal combustion engine, etc., coupled to a drive shaft and control elements (such as truck sensors, truck control systems, etc., as shown schematically in FIG. 13), and wheels 314a-314d.”), and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to position the pair of forks within the target placement location (see at least [0088] “As described in greater detail below in reference to steps 714-724, once the AMT 300 enters the trailer 111, the truck control system 310 can identify a fork lateral position 816 (FIGS. 8G and 9F), a truck unloading position 818 (FIGS. 8I and 9H), and a pallet unloading position 820 (FIGS. 8H, 8I and 9H). The pallet unloading position 820 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will place the pallet 605. The fork lateral position 816 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will be positioned when it uses the fork boom 303 to move the fork 302 holding the pallet 605 laterally to be aligned with the pallet unloading position 820. The truck unloading position 818 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will be positioned when it uses fork boom 303 to lower the laterally positioned fork 302 to place the pallet 605 on the floor of the trailer 111 in the pallet unloading position 820. As described below, the truck control system 310 can determine these locations based on signals from the front sensors 330b and/or a record of where the AMT 300 deposited one or more previous pallets.”).
Examiner interprets that target placement location is encompassed at least by unloading position 820.
Dooley more explicitly teaches a target placement height (see at least [0107] “In certain embodiments, the lifting mechanism of a mobile robot can adjust its height in response to an end user's request,”); manipulate the load-handling assembly to place the pair of forks at the target placement height (see at least [0107] “In certain embodiments, the lifting mechanism of a mobile robot can adjust its height in response to an end user's request,”), determine if resistance is present against the pallet (see at least [0090] “In certain embodiments, the upper deck, other support surface, and/or other part of a mobile robot may include contact and/or displacement sensors located around a movable joint where the upper deck, other support surface, and/or other part of the mobile robot connect to a structure of the mobile robot. In these embodiments, the mobile robot can detect contact with obstacles through the shift in position of the upper deck, other support surface, and/or other part of the mobile robot relative to the support structure.”), and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to retract the forks from the pallet if resistance is present (see at least [0252] “In certain embodiments, a mobile robot can temporarily apply power to a caster wheel in a direction of rotation opposite to the dominant direction of rotation for a caster wheel if the motor connected to the caster wheel detects resistance in attempting to rotate the caster wheel in the dominant direction,”).
Examiner interprets that a target placement height is encompassed at least by an end user's request, manipulate the load-handling assembly to place the pair of forks at the target placement height is encompassed at least by lifting mechanism of a mobile robot adjusting its height in response to an end user's request, determine if resistance is present against the pallet is encompassed at least by the mobile robot can detect contact with obstacles through the shift in position of the upper deck, other support surface, and/or other part of the mobile robot relative to the support structure, and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to retract the forks from the pallet if resistance is present is encompassed at least by apply power to a caster wheel in a direction of rotation opposite to the dominant direction of rotation for a caster wheel if the motor connected to the caster wheel detects resistance.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Zevenbergen of a system for flush placement of pallets by an autonomous forklift, comprising: a controller; a sensor module containing at least one sensor communicatively coupled to the controller; a perception module communicatively coupled the controller, the perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module; a planning module communicatively coupled to the controller, the planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle, a target location that overlaps at least partially with the exclusion area, a drive wheel communicatively coupled to the controller; and a load-handling assembly communicatively coupled to the controller, the load-handling assembly comprising a pair of forks capable of supporting a pallet, wherein the controller is configured to: manipulate the drive wheel to navigate the autonomous forklift to a location in proximity to the target placement location and the suggested teaching of Zevenbergen of manipulate the load-handling assembly to place the pair of forks at the target placement height, manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to position the pair of forks within the target placement location, and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to retract the forks from the pallet if resistance is present with the teachings of a perception module communicatively coupled the controller, the perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module; and a planning module communicatively coupled to the controller, the planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle found in Taylor, a target placement location, wherein the controller is configured to: manipulate the drive wheel to navigate the autonomous forklift to a location in proximity to the target placement location, and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to position the pair of forks within the target placement location found in Hoofard, and a target placement height; manipulate the load-handling assembly to place the pair of forks at the target placement height, determine if resistance is present against the pallet, and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to retract the forks from the pallet if resistance is present found in Dooley. One could combine the teachings in order to have a system for flush placement of pallets by an autonomous forklift, comprising: a controller; a sensor module containing at least one sensor communicatively coupled to the controller; a perception module communicatively coupled the controller, the perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module; a planning module communicatively coupled to the controller, the planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle, a target placement location that overlaps at least partially with the exclusion area, and a target placement height; a drive wheel communicatively coupled to the controller; and a load-handling assembly communicatively coupled to the controller, the load-handling assembly comprising a pair of forks capable of supporting a pallet, wherein the controller is configured to: manipulate the drive wheel to navigate the autonomous forklift to a location in proximity to the target placement location, manipulate the load-handling assembly to place the pair of forks at the target placement height, manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to position the pair of forks within the target placement location, determine if resistance is present against the pallet, and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to retract the forks from the pallet if resistance is present with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to safely and efficiently operate a forklift in an environment (see at least Zevenbergen,[0034]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Zevenbergen, Taylor, Hoofard, and Dooley teaches the system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Zevenbergen teaches wherein the at least one sensor is selected from a group consisting of an Inertial Measurement Unit (“IMU”), a Light Detection and Ranging (“LiDAR”) system, and a camera (see at least [0092] “Any of the robotic devices described herein may include one or more sensor(s) such as…cameras (e.g., color cameras, grayscale cameras, and/or infrared cameras), depth sensors (e.g., Red Green Blue plus Depth (RGB-D), lasers, a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) device, a structured-light scanner, and/or a time-of-flight camera), a stereo camera, motion sensors (e.g., gyroscope, accelerometer, inertial measurement unit (IMU),”).
Examiner interprets that the claim is written in the alternative and therefore only one of the limitations needs to be addressed.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Zevenbergen, Taylor, Hoofard, and Dooley teaches the system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Zevenbergen teaches wherein the exclusion area is determined based on a classification of the obstacle (see at least [0103] “The threshold distances may be fixed, or may be dynamically sized based on a classification or type of object (e.g., whether the object is fixed, movable, or moving), a size of the object, a type of vehicle, or a speed with which the vehicle is traveling, among other factors.”).
However, Taylor more explicitly teaches wherein the exclusion area is determined based on a classification of the obstacle (see at least [0040] “A buffer region may be placed around each of the objects identified as an obstacle. The buffer region may operate to enforce a minimum distance (i.e., a first threshold distance) away from the obstacle at which the vehicle is to stop to avoid colliding with the obstacle. The minimum distance may be based on a size of the obstacle, a type or classification of the obstacle, a speed of the vehicle, a size of the vehicle, a load carried by the vehicle, and/or a task assigned to the vehicle, among other factors.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Zevenbergen wherein the exclusion area is determined based on a classification of the obstacle with the more explicit teaching of the same found in Taylor with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to promote safe operation of a vehicle in an environment (see at least Zevenbergen, [0034]) and improve vehicle operations within an environment (see at least Taylor, [0150]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Zevenbergen, Taylor, Hoofard, and Dooley teaches the system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Zevenbergen does not explicitly teach wherein the location in proximity to the target placement location is a minimum distance from the obstacle based on the exclusion areas where the autonomous vehicle can traverse in a safe manner.
However, Taylor more explicitly teaches wherein the location in proximity to the target placement location is a minimum distance from the obstacle based on the exclusion areas where the autonomous vehicle can traverse in a safe manner (see at least [0040] “A buffer region may be placed around each of the objects identified as an obstacle. The buffer region may operate to enforce a minimum distance (i.e., a first threshold distance) away from the obstacle at which the vehicle is to stop to avoid colliding with the obstacle. The minimum distance may be based on a size of the obstacle, a type or classification of the obstacle, a speed of the vehicle, a size of the vehicle, a load carried by the vehicle, and/or a task assigned to the vehicle, among other factors.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zevenbergen with teaching of wherein the location in proximity to the target placement location is a minimum distance from the obstacle based on the exclusion areas where the autonomous vehicle can traverse in a safe manner found in Taylor. One could combine the teachings in order to have a system wherein the location in proximity to the target placement location is a minimum distance from the obstacle based on the exclusion areas where the autonomous vehicle can traverse in a safe manner with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to promote safe operation of a vehicle in an environment (see at least Zevenbergen, [0034]) and improve vehicle operations within an environment (see at least Taylor, [0150]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Zevenbergen, Taylor, Hoofard, and Dooley teaches the system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Zevenbergen does not explicitly teach wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a stall current signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly or a motor coupled to the drive wheel.
Dooley more explicitly teaches wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a stall current signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly or a motor coupled to the drive wheel (see at least [0147] “a mobile robot can apply some degree of power to the second motor controlling the rotatable retrieval arms as the retrieval arms and retrieval tips are extending laterally toward the intended receiving pocket, so that the ends of the retrieval tips press up against the underside surface of the retrievable tray and/or retrievable item. In this embodiment, the mobile robot can use encoder position and/or motor current feedback from the second motor controlling the rotation of the retrieval arms to determine if the retrieval trips have begun rotating into a receiving pocket,” and [0253] “if the motor connected to the caster wheel detects elevated current indicating that the caster wheel may be encountering a low obstacle and/or an area higher resistance in the floor surface” also see at least [0252] and [0254]).
Examiner interprets that the claim is written in the alternative with the recitation of “a stall current signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly or a motor coupled to the drive wheel” therefore only one of the limitations needs to be addressed and that stall current signal is encompassed at least by motor current feedback and/or elevated current.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zevenbergen with the teaching of wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a stall current signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly or a motor coupled to the drive wheel found in Dooley. One would have been motivated to do so in order to have a system wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a stall current signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly or a motor coupled to the drive wheel with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to increase system reliability by detecting blockages and further improve energy efficiency in the system by avoiding unnecessary operation.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Zevenbergen, Taylor, Hoofard, and Dooley teaches the system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Zevenbergen does not explicitly teach wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a hydraulic pressure signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly.
However, Dooley more explicitly teaches wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a hydraulic pressure signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly (see at least [0259] “In certain embodiments, one or more of the support surfaces of a mobile robot can include sensors configured to detect if a retrievable item and/or other object is resting on and/or in contact with the support surface. In certain embodiments, one or more pressure sensors or pressure-responsive sensors may be connected to one or more support surfaces of the mobile robot and/or to structures that connect to one or more support surfaces. In certain embodiments, the pressure sensors or pressure-responsive sensors may provide the weight of the retrievable item and/or other objects that are resting on the support surface, and/or the pressure of one or more other objects, such as an overhanging obstacle or a the hand of an individual who is using the mobile robot for support, is exerting on the support surface. In certain embodiments, these sensors can detect weight and/or pressure in one or more specific areas of one or more support surfaces. In certain embodiments, these sensors can be used for a number of functions including, but not limited to: determining the load from a retrievable item and/or other object; enabling the robot to stop, provide feedback to the user and/or enter a safety mode if the load on the support surface exceeds a specified operating limit; provide input to cause the control system of the mobile robot to check other sensors to confirm if an overhanding obstacle and/or other object is interfering with the operation of the support surface; provide information on the change of weight of a retrievable item and/or other object on the support surface to estimate usage and/or consumption of items stored on the retrievable item and/or other objects on the support surface; and/or wait for the weight and/or pressure read from the support surface to change to indicate an end user action and/or event. In certain embodiments, other surfaces of the mobile robot may include weight, pressure and/or other occupancy sensors, including underside surfaces of decks and/or other support surfaces of the mobile robot that may come into contact with other obstacle during raising, lowering and/or other movements of surface of the mobile robot relative to other surfaces intrinsic and/or extrinsic to the mobile robot.”).
Examiner interprets that hydraulic pressure signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly is encompassed at least by one or more pressure sensors or pressure-responsive sensors connected to one or more support surfaces of the mobile robot and/or to structures that are connected to one or more support surfaces.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zevenbergen with the teaching of wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a hydraulic pressure signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly found in Dooley. One could combine the teachings in order to have a system wherein the controller determines if resistance is present based on a hydraulic pressure signal from an actuator coupled to the load-handling assembly with at reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated in order to promote safe and effective operation of a vehicle in various environments (see at least Dooley, [0074]).
Regarding claim 8, Zevenbergen teaches a system for flush placement of pallets by an autonomous forklift, comprising: a controller (see at least [0046] “As shown in FIG. 1, robotic system 100 may include processor(s) 102, data storage 104, and controller(s) 108, which together may be part of a control system 118.” and [0056] “Operations of control system 118 may be carried out by processor(s) 102. Alternatively, these operations may be carried out by controller 108, or a combination of processor(s) 102 and controller 108.”); a sensor module containing at least one sensor communicatively coupled to the controller (see at least [0046] “Robotic system 100 may also include sensor(s) 112” also see at least [0047] “Processor(s) 102 may also directly or indirectly interact with other components of robotic system 100, such as sensor(s) 112,” also see at least [0049] and Fig.1); a perception module communicatively coupled the controller, the perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module (see at least [0079] “If an obstacle is detected, obstacle detection subsystem 234 can provide one or more communications indicating obstacle detection to path-following subsystem 238. The one or more communications indicating obstacle detection can include location information about one or more positions of one or more obstacles detected by obstacle detection subsystem 234 and/or identification information about the one or more obstacles detected by obstacle detection subsystem 234.” and [0060] “Sensor(s) 112 may provide sensor data to processor(s) 102 (perhaps by way of data 107) to allow for interaction of robotic system 100 with its environment, as well as monitoring of the operation of robotic system 100...For example, sensor(s) 112 may capture data corresponding to the terrain of the environment, location and/or identity of nearby objects (e.g., pallets, environmental landmarks), which may assist with environment recognition and navigation...Sensor(s) 112 may monitor the environment in real time, and detect obstacles, elements of the terrain, weather conditions, temperature, and/or other aspects of the environment.” also see at least [0074]); a planning module communicatively coupled to the controller, the planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle (see at least [0102] “FIG. 4D illustrates threshold area 438 around pallet rack 434 and threshold area 442 around pallet 422. Threshold area 438 may be defined as an area located within threshold distance 440 of a perimeter of pallet rack 434. Similarly, threshold area 442 may be defined as an area located within threshold distance 444 of a perimeter of pallet 422. Threshold distances 440 and 444 may be referred to as object safety thresholds. In some embodiments, threshold distances 440 and 444 may be defined by a safety standard for a workspace in which robotic devices work alongside humans. In some implementations, threshold distances greater than those defined by the safety standard may be used.”) and a target location that overlaps at least partially with the exclusion area (see at least [0054] “control system 118 may receive an input (e.g., from a user or from another vehicle) indicating an instruction to move a pallet from a first location of a warehouse to a second location of the warehouse.” and [0095] “Path 401 may run from (or may form part of a path running from) a starting position within the environment to target position within the environment. Path 401 may be planned around known or fixed obstacles (e.g., walls) in the environment based on kinematic and dynamic properties of vehicle 400. Path 401 may be made up of a plurality of discrete ordered positions 410, 412, 414, 416, 418, and 420 (i.e., positions 410-420). Positions 410-420 may be target positions for vehicle 400 to follow in sequence to move along path 401. Before or while causing vehicle 400 to move along path 401, the control system may analyze path 401 to determine whether any caution regions will arise as a result of vehicle 400 moving therealong, and may cause projector 408 to project indications of any of these caution regions onto the environment.” also see at least [0115]); a drive wheel communicatively coupled to the controller (see at least [0057] “Mechanical components 110 represent hardware of robotic system 100 that may enable robotic system 100 to perform physical operations. As a few examples, robotic system 100 may include physical members such...wheel(s),” and [0049] “Controller 108 may include one or more electrical circuits, units of digital logic, computer chips, and/or microprocessors that are configured to (perhaps among other tasks) interface between any combination of mechanical components 110,” also see at least [0090]); and a load-handling assembly communicatively coupled to the controller, the load-handling assembly comprising a pair of forks capable of supporting a pallet (see at least [0090] “FIG. 3B shows an autonomous fork truck, according to an example embodiment. More specifically, autonomous fork truck 360 may include forklift 362 for lifting and/or moving pallets of boxes or other larger materials.” also see at least [0094] “Vehicle 400 may be a pallet jack or fork truck having tines 402 and 404. Tines 402 and 404 may allow vehicle 400 to interact with pallets 422-432, or other storage structures, by placing the tines into slots within the pallet, thereby enabling pick-up, transportation, and drop-off of the pallet.”), where the controller is configured to: manipulate the drive wheel to navigate the autonomous forklift to a location in proximity to the target location (see at least [0054]-[0055] “control system 118 may receive an input (e.g., from a user or from another vehicle) indicating an instruction to move a pallet from a first location of a warehouse to a second location of the warehouse...Based on this input, control system 118 may perform operations to cause robotic system 100 to use sensors 112 to analyze the environment of the warehouse to locate the pallet and subsequently use mechanical components 110 to pick up and move the pallet.” and [0090] “Autonomous fork truck 360 may additionally include wheels 364 for locomotion to transport pallets within the warehouse.”).
Examiner interprets that a controller is encompassed at least by control system 118, processor 102, and/or controller 108, sensor module is encompassed at least by sensor(s) 112, perception module is encompassed at least by obstacle detection subsystem 234, exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle is encompassed at least by threshold area 438 and/or threshold distance 440, drive wheel is encompassed at least by wheel(s) and/or mechanical components 110, and load-handling assembly is encompassed at least by forklift 362 and/or tines 402 and 404.
Zevenbergen does not explicitly teach but suggests manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to position the pair of forks is within the target placement location (see at least [0090] “FIG. 3B shows an autonomous fork truck, according to an example embodiment. More specifically, autonomous fork truck 360 may include forklift 362 for lifting and/or moving pallets of boxes or other larger materials. In some examples, forklift 362 may be elevated to reach different racks of a storage rack or other fixed storage structure within a warehouse.”) and manipulate at least one of the drive wheel and the load-handling assembly to retract the forks from the pallet if resistance is present (see at least 0060] “Sensor(s) 112 may provide sensor data to processor(s) 102 (perhaps by way of data 107) to allow for interaction of robotic system 100 with its environment, as well as monitoring of the operation of robotic system 100. The sensor data may be used in evaluation of various factors for activation, movement, and deactivation of mechanical components 110 and electrical components 116 by control system 118.”).
Zevenbergen does not explicitly teach a target placement location and determine if resistance is present against the pallet.
Taylor more explicitly teaches a perception module communicatively coupled the controller, the perception module identifying an obstacle in data received from the sensor module (see at least [0093] “In some embodiments, computing device 600 can include one or more sensors 620. Sensor(s) 620 can be configured to measure conditions in an environment for computing device 600 and provide data about that environment. For example, sensor(s) 620 can include one or more of: (i) an identification sensor to identify other objects and/or devices”); and a planning module communicatively coupled to the controller, the planning module determining an exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle (see at least [0147] “in addition to classification, the control system may determine an orientation of the object, and determine the buffer region based on the orientation.” and [0040] “A buffer region may be placed around each of the objects identified as an obstacle. The buffer region may operate to enforce a minimum distance (i.e., a first threshold distance) away from the obstacle at which the vehicle is to stop to avoid colliding with the obstacle.”).
Examiner interprets that perception module is encompassed at least by computing device 600, planning module is encompassed at least by control system and exclusion area adjacent to the obstacle is encompassed at least by first threshold distance and/or buffer region.
Hoofard more explicitly teaches a target placement location (see at least [0088] “As described in greater detail below in reference to steps 714-724, once the AMT 300 enters the trailer 111, the truck control system 310 can identify a fork lateral position 816 (FIGS. 8G and 9F), a truck unloading position 818 (FIGS. 8I and 9H), and a pallet unloading position 820 (FIGS. 8H, 8I and 9H). The pallet unloading position 820 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will place the pallet 605. The fork lateral position 816 is a location in the trailer 111 where the AMT 300 will be positioned when it uses t