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 .
Application status
This office action is in response to application filed on 03/26/2024 and Preliminary Amendment filed on 03/26/2024. Claims 1-15 are pending. Claims 1-15 are rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/26/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Applicant has mentioned “wherein the autonomous device defines a drone, and the plurality of coordinates each define a roll, pitch, and yaw” in claim 8. Even though applicant disclosed that the autonomous vehicle can be a drone, applicant fails to provide describe in the specification that the plurality of coordinates each define a roll, pitch, and yaw.
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 7, 8, and 15 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the plurality of coordinates” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the plurality of coordinates” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the plurality of coordinates” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-9, 11-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reith (US 20220009551 A1), and further in view of HATAYAMA (US 20210003418 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Reith teaches A method for determining errors associated with navigation (Reith, at least one para. 0002; “The present disclosure relates to a method and a system for providing transformation parameters for transforming a vehicle position between coordinate systems. The present disclosure also relates to a control unit for executing such a method. The present disclosure also relates to a vehicle that has such a control unit or such a system.”) of an autonomous device (Reith, at least one para. 0033; “The vehicle can move autonomously along the route”), the method comprising:
determining a plurality of locations within a physical environment so as to define a known path that connects the plurality of locations, each location represented by global coordinates of a global reference frame (Reith, at least one para. 0018; “The method contains a step in which the vehicle travels along a trajectory. The vehicle can travel on a street, a navigable substrate, or any other finished surface. The trajectory can be traveled automatically or by remote control, or manually by a driver. The trajectory can have a predefined geometry.”) and (Reith, at least one para. 0053; “In one embodiment of the transformation system, the provider is a route the vehicle can travel along the trajectory. The route can be a road in a harbor or a construction site on which the vehicle can travel with a predefined trajectory geometry.”, It is inherent that the predefined geometry or road can be identified with exact global coordinates);
as the autonomous device moves along the known path within the physical environment, receiving a plurality of positions from the autonomous device, the plurality of positions defining respective local coordinates of a local reference frame corresponding to the autonomous device (Reith, at least one para. 0020; “In another step, the position of the vehicle is acquired in the first coordinate system while traveling along a trajectory using a first position detection system. The first position detection system can be, e.g. the transponder system for detecting positions of the vehicle within the transponder coordinate system. ”);
transforming the local coordinates of the local reference frame to the global reference frame, so as to define respective transformed local coordinates (Reith, at least one para. 0023; “The method contains a further step in which transformation parameters are derived between the coordinate systems on the basis of the positions of the vehicle acquired in the coordinate system and on the basis of at least one geometric parameter of the trajectory. Transformation parameters between the coordinate systems can therefore be calculated on the basis of the detected positions and/or geometric parameters. The acquired positions can be used for this as ground control points or corresponding points for calculating transformation parameters.”);
comparing the transformed local coordinates to the global coordinates so as to determine remnant error values associated with the respective transformed local coordinates (Reith, at least one para. 0029; “A trajectory geometry, or a geometric parameter, can be obtained in both coordinate systems with the respective position detection systems, and compared with at least one known geometric parameter of the trajectory. A position acquisition with a respective position detection system can then be corrected or calibrated on the basis of such a comparison. By comparing trajectory geometries acquired with both position detection systems, relative differences or gaps between the two position detection systems can be determined and corrected. Absolute differences or systematic position errors can be determined and corrected by comparing trajectory geometries acquired using one of the position detection systems with a predefined trajectory geometry.”); and
based on the error values, generating a 3D representation corresponding to the physical environment, the 3D representation indicating an amount of error throughout the physical environment.
Reith does not explicitly teach that based on the error values, generating a 3D representation corresponding to the physical environment, the 3D representation indicating an amount of error throughout the physical environment.
However, HATAYAMA, in the same field of endeavor (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention relates to a robot management system, a robot management method, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and an information processing program.”) teaches based on the error values (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0128; “the error characteristic”), generating a 3D representation corresponding to the physical environment, the 3D representation (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076; “Referring to FIG. 2B, a map generation-only robot 224 capable of generating a three-dimensional map generates three-dimensional map data 224a of the whole store 240, and transmits it to the information processing apparatus 210. The information processing apparatus 210 generates a common map from the three-dimensional map data 224a, and displays it on the display screen 211.”) indicating an amount of error throughout the physical environment (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0128; “The generation map attribute 502 includes a map type, data indicating whether the map is a two-dimensional map or a three-dimensional map, a sensor type used for map generation, the accuracy of the generation map, the error characteristic of the generation map, and the data format of the generation map.”).
Reith and HATAYAMA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have generate the 3D representation of the HATAYAMA with teaching of Reith. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the autonomous vehicle can determine obstacle can overcome based on the condition of the obstacle (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0128). Additionally, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 3, Reith teaches The method as recited in claim 1, the method further comprising: (Reith, at least one para. 0021; “The method contains a further step for acquiring a position of the vehicle in the second coordinate system while traveling along the trajectory with a second position detection system. The second position detection system can be the satellite navigation system for detecting positions of the vehicle in the satellite navigation coordinate system. The satellite navigation system can be a system based on GNSS information.”).
Reith does not explicitly teach that generating 3D representations
However, HATAYAMA, in the same field of endeavor (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention relates to a robot management system, a robot management method, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and an information processing program.”) teaches generating 3D representations (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076; “Referring to FIG. 2B, a map generation-only robot 224 capable of generating a three-dimensional map generates three-dimensional map data 224a of the whole store 240, and transmits it to the information processing apparatus 210. The information processing apparatus 210 generates a common map from the three-dimensional map data 224a, and displays it on the display screen 211.”).
Reith and HATAYAMA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have generate the 3D representation of the HATAYAMA with teaching of Reith. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Furthermore, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (map data of HATAYAMA) for another (respective coordinate of the local and global coordinates of Reith) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, HATAYAMA teaches The method as recited in claim 1, based on the 3D representations (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076; “Referring to FIG. 2B, a map generation-only robot 224 capable of generating a three-dimensional map generates three-dimensional map data 224a of the whole store 240, and transmits it to the information processing apparatus 210. The information processing apparatus 210 generates a common map from the three-dimensional map data 224a, and displays it on the display screen 211.”), controlling the autonomous device to move along the path (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0060; “According to this example embodiment, it is possible to control, by one common map, multiple types of robots that move based on map data in different formats indicating movable areas, thereby efficiently controlling the multiple types of robots.”).
Regarding claim 5, HATAYAMA teaches The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the autonomous device defines a first autonomous device that operates on a first locally sourced map, the method further comprising: based on the 3D representation, converting locally sourced poses of a second autonomous device that operates on a different map than the first locally sourced map of the first autonomous device (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0059; “As shown in FIG. 1, the information processing apparatus 100 comprises an acquirer 101, a common map generator 102, and a specific map generator 103. The acquirer 101 acquires map data 141 (122) generated by at least one robot 140 (120) among the multiple types of robots 120 and 140 that move based on map data in different formats indicating movable areas. The common map generator 102 generates, from the acquired map data 141 (122), a common map 121 for commonly managing the movements of multiple types of robots 110 to 130. The specific map generator 103 generates, from the common map 121, multiple types of specific maps 131 to 133 to be respectively used by the multiple types of robots 110 to 130.”, in other words, robot 120 is operated on map 132, and robot 110 is operated on map 131).
Regarding claim 7, Reith teaches The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the autonomous device defines a robot or vehicle, and the plurality of coordinates each define a first coordinate along a first direction, a second coordinate along a second direction that is substantially perpendicular to the first direction (Reith, at least one para. 0056 and FIG. 1; “When travelling along the trajectory 11, a first position detection system (not shown) on the vehicle 10 acquires vehicle positions 12 in the first coordinate system 20, shown by way of example. A second position detection system (not shown) on the vehicle 10 acquires the vehicle positions 12 in the second coordinate system 40.”), and a third coordinate along a third direction that is substantially perpendicular to both the first and second directions.
Reith does not explicitly teach that and a third coordinate along a third direction that is substantially perpendicular to both the first and second directions.
However, HATAYAMA, in the same field of endeavor (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention relates to a robot management system, a robot management method, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and an information processing program.”) teaches and a third coordinate along a third direction that is substantially perpendicular to both the first and second directions (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0194; “In FIG. 17, a drone 1726 is added as a map providing apparatus for generation of a common map. Map data 1726a from the drone is also transmitted to the information processing apparatus 1710, and is used to generate a common map, and the generated common map is displayed on a display screen 1711.”, it is inherent that the drone can fly in third direction, which is the Z axis.).
Reith and HATAYAMA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the of the (x,y) coordinate system of Reith with the (x,y,z) coordinate system of HATAYAMA. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the height of the autonomous vehicle can be taken into consideration (HATAYAMA; 0163).
Regarding claim 8, HATAYAMA teaches The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the autonomous device defines a drone, and the plurality of coordinates each define a roll, pitch, and yaw (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0195; “Note that the map data 1726a from the drone 1726 may indicate the flight range of the drone or the bird's eye view of the entire room.”, It is inherent that a flying drone operates according to roll, pitch, and yaw when the drone is traveled in x, y and z direction).
Regarding claim 9, Reith teaches A global fleet management system (Reith, at least one para. 0002; “The present disclosure relates to a method and a system for providing transformation parameters for transforming a vehicle position between coordinate systems. The present disclosure also relates to a control unit for executing such a method. The present disclosure also relates to a vehicle that has such a control unit or such a system.”), the global fleet management system comprising:
a processor; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the system to (Reith, at least one para. 0069; “A control unit 90 comprises the computer for executing the steps of the method for deriving the transformation parameter.”):
determine a plurality of locations within a physical environment so as to define a path that connects the plurality of locations, each location represented by global coordinates of a global reference frame (Reith, at least one para. 0018; “The method contains a step in which the vehicle travels along a trajectory. The vehicle can travel on a street, a navigable substrate, or any other finished surface. The trajectory can be traveled automatically or by remote control, or manually by a driver. The trajectory can have a predefined geometry.”) and (Reith, at least one para. 0053; “In one embodiment of the transformation system, the provider is a route the vehicle can travel along the trajectory. The route can be a road in a harbor or a construction site on which the vehicle can travel with a predefined trajectory geometry.”, It is inherent that the predefined geometry or road can be identified with exact global coordinates);
as the autonomous device moves along the path within the physical environment,
receive a plurality of positions from the autonomous device, the plurality of positions defining respective local coordinates of a local reference frame corresponding to the autonomous device (Reith, at least one para. 0020; “In another step, the position of the vehicle is acquired in the first coordinate system while traveling along a trajectory using a first position detection system. The first position detection system can be, e.g. the transponder system for detecting positions of the vehicle within the transponder coordinate system. ”);
transform the local coordinates of the local reference frame to the global reference frame, so as to define respective transformed local coordinates (Reith, at least one para. 0023; “The method contains a further step in which transformation parameters are derived between the coordinate systems on the basis of the positions of the vehicle acquired in the coordinate system and on the basis of at least one geometric parameter of the trajectory. Transformation parameters between the coordinate systems can therefore be calculated on the basis of the detected positions and/or geometric parameters. The acquired positions can be used for this as ground control points or corresponding points for calculating transformation parameters.”);
compare the transformed local coordinates to the global coordinates so as to determine error values associated with the respective transformed local coordinates (Reith, at least one para. 0029; “A trajectory geometry, or a geometric parameter, can be obtained in both coordinate systems with the respective position detection systems, and compared with at least one known geometric parameter of the trajectory. A position acquisition with a respective position detection system can then be corrected or calibrated on the basis of such a comparison. By comparing trajectory geometries acquired with both position detection systems, relative differences or gaps between the two position detection systems can be determined and corrected. Absolute differences or systematic position errors can be determined and corrected by comparing trajectory geometries acquired using one of the position detection systems with a predefined trajectory geometry.”); and
based on the error values, generate a 3D representation corresponding to the physical environment, based on the error values, the 3D representation indicating an amount of error throughout the physical environment.
Reith does not explicitly teach that based on the error values, generate a 3D representation corresponding to the physical environment, based on the error values, the 3D representation indicating an amount of error throughout the physical environment.
However, HATAYAMA, in the same field of endeavor (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention relates to a robot management system, a robot management method, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and an information processing program.”) teaches based on the error values (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0128; “the error characteristic”), generate a 3D representation corresponding to the physical environment, based on the error values (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076; “Referring to FIG. 2B, a map generation-only robot 224 capable of generating a three-dimensional map generates three-dimensional map data 224a of the whole store 240, and transmits it to the information processing apparatus 210. The information processing apparatus 210 generates a common map from the three-dimensional map data 224a, and displays it on the display screen 211.”) the 3D representation indicating an amount of error throughout the physical environment (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0128; “The generation map attribute 502 includes a map type, data indicating whether the map is a two-dimensional map or a three-dimensional map, a sensor type used for map generation, the accuracy of the generation map, the error characteristic of the generation map, and the data format of the generation map.”).
Reith and HATAYAMA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have generate the 3D representation of the HATAYAMA with teaching of Reith. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the autonomous vehicle can determine obstacle can overcome based on the condition of the obstacle (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0128). Additionally, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 11, Reith teaches The system as recited in claim 9, the memory further storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to: (Reith, at least one para. 0021; “The method contains a further step for acquiring a position of the vehicle in the second coordinate system while traveling along the trajectory with a second position detection system. The second position detection system can be the satellite navigation system for detecting positions of the vehicle in the satellite navigation coordinate system. The satellite navigation system can be a system based on GNSS information.”).
Reith does not explicitly teach that generate 3D representations
However, HATAYAMA, in the same field of endeavor (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention relates to a robot management system, a robot management method, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and an information processing program.”) teaches generate 3D representations (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076; “Referring to FIG. 2B, a map generation-only robot 224 capable of generating a three-dimensional map generates three-dimensional map data 224a of the whole store 240, and transmits it to the information processing apparatus 210. The information processing apparatus 210 generates a common map from the three-dimensional map data 224a, and displays it on the display screen 211.”).
Reith and HATAYAMA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have generate the 3D representation of the HATAYAMA with teaching of Reith. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Furthermore, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (map data of HATAYAMA) for another (respective coordinate of the local and global coordinates of Reith) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 12, HATAYAMA teaches The system as recited in claim 9, the memory further storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to: based on the 3D representation (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076; “Referring to FIG. 2B, a map generation-only robot 224 capable of generating a three-dimensional map generates three-dimensional map data 224a of the whole store 240, and transmits it to the information processing apparatus 210. The information processing apparatus 210 generates a common map from the three-dimensional map data 224a, and displays it on the display screen 211.”), control the autonomous device to move along a desired path (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0060; “According to this example embodiment, it is possible to control, by one common map, multiple types of robots that move based on map data in different formats indicating movable areas, thereby efficiently controlling the multiple types of robots.”).
Regarding claim 13, HATAYAMA teaches The system as recited in claim 9, wherein the autonomous device defines a first autonomous device that operates on a first locally sourced map, and the memory further stores instructions that, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to: based on the 3D representation, convert locally sourced poses of a second autonomous device that operates on a different map than the first locally sourced map of the first autonomous device (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0059; “As shown in FIG. 1, the information processing apparatus 100 comprises an acquirer 101, a common map generator 102, and a specific map generator 103. The acquirer 101 acquires map data 141 (122) generated by at least one robot 140 (120) among the multiple types of robots 120 and 140 that move based on map data in different formats indicating movable areas. The common map generator 102 generates, from the acquired map data 141 (122), a common map 121 for commonly managing the movements of multiple types of robots 110 to 130. The specific map generator 103 generates, from the common map 121, multiple types of specific maps 131 to 133 to be respectively used by the multiple types of robots 110 to 130.”, in other words, robot 120 is operated on map 132, and robot 110 is operated on map 131).
Regarding claim 15, Reith teaches The system as recited in claim 9, wherein the autonomous device defines a vehicle or robot, and the plurality of coordinates each define a first coordinate along a first direction, a second coordinate along a second direction that is substantially perpendicular to the first direction (Reith, at least one para. 0056 and FIG. 1; “When travelling along the trajectory 11, a first position detection system (not shown) on the vehicle 10 acquires vehicle positions 12 in the first coordinate system 20, shown by way of example. A second position detection system (not shown) on the vehicle 10 acquires the vehicle positions 12 in the second coordinate system 40.”), and a third coordinate along a third direction that is substantially perpendicular to both the first and second directions.
Reith does not explicitly teach that and a third coordinate along a third direction that is substantially perpendicular to both the first and second directions.
However, HATAYAMA, in the same field of endeavor (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention relates to a robot management system, a robot management method, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and an information processing program.”) teaches and a third coordinate along a third direction that is substantially perpendicular to both the first and second directions (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0194; “In FIG. 17, a drone 1726 is added as a map providing apparatus for generation of a common map. Map data 1726a from the drone is also transmitted to the information processing apparatus 1710, and is used to generate a common map, and the generated common map is displayed on a display screen 1711.”, it is inherent that the drone can fly in third direction, which is the Z axis.).
Reith and HATAYAMA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the of the (x,y) coordinate system of Reith with the (x,y,z) coordinate system of HATAYAMA. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the height of the autonomous vehicle can be taken into consideration (HATAYAMA; 0163).
Claim(s) 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reith (US 20220009551 A1) and HATAYAMA (US 20210003418 A1) as applied to claim 1 and 9 above, respectively, and further in view of Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US 20220026920 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Reith teaches The method as recited in claim 1, the method further comprising: (Reith, at least one para. 0015; “The transformation can be a two dimensional similarity transformation with four transformation parameters. The four transformation parameters can comprise a rotation angle, a translation vector, which can contain two translation parameters, and a scaling factor.”).
Even though Reith teaches transformation, the combination of Reith and HATAYAMA does not explicitly teach that the transformation is based on performing linear transformations.
However, Ebrahimi Afrouzi, in the same field of endeavor (Ebrahimi Afrouzi, at least one para. 0003; “This disclosure relates to autonomous robots and more particularly to light weight and real time SLAM methods and techniques for autonomous robots.”) teaches performing linear transformations (Ebrahimi Afrouzi, at least one para. 0809; “the processor may use three dimensional linear or non-linear transformations to map translations, similarities, affine, by least square method or using other methods.”).
The combination of Reith, HATAYAMA, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transformation of Reith with the teaching of Ebrahimi Afrouzi. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 10, Reith teaches The system as recited in claim 9, the memory further storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to: (Reith, at least one para. 0015; “The transformation can be a two dimensional similarity transformation with four transformation parameters. The four transformation parameters can comprise a rotation angle, a translation vector, which can contain two translation parameters, and a scaling factor.”).
Even though Reith teaches transformation, the combination of Reith and HATAYAMA does not explicitly teach that the transformation is based on perform linear transformations.
However, Ebrahimi Afrouzi, in the same field of endeavor (Ebrahimi Afrouzi, at least one para. 0003; “This disclosure relates to autonomous robots and more particularly to light weight and real time SLAM methods and techniques for autonomous robots.”) teaches perform linear transformations (Ebrahimi Afrouzi, at least one para. 0809; “the processor may use three dimensional linear or non-linear transformations to map translations, similarities, affine, by least square method or using other methods.”).
the combination of Reith, HATAYAMA, and Ebrahimi Afrouzi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transformation of Reith with the teaching of Ebrahimi Afrouzi. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claim(s) 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reith (US 20220009551 A1) and HATAYAMA (US 20210003418 A1) as applied to claim 1 and 9 above, respectively, and further in view of Li (US 20200109954 A1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Reith and HATAYAMA teaches The method as recited in claim 1, the method (Reith, at least one para. 0018-0029) and (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076, 0128) further comprising:
The combination of Reith and HATAYAMA does not explicitly teach determining a plurality of new locations within the physical environment so as to define a new path that connects the plurality of new locations; and
based on the 3D representation, controlling the autonomous device to move along the new path.
However, Li, in the same field of endeavor (Li, at least one para. 0002; “Vehicles can be outfitted with various types of sensors to sense and navigate through an environment without (or with minimal) human intervention. These vehicles can detect a surrounding environment and enable autonomous navigation while moving around.”) teaches determining a plurality of new locations within the physical environment so as to define a new path that connects the plurality of new locations (Li, at least one para. 0387; “In some embodiments, the cloud server may also help the vehicle navigate along a planned route. For example, the cloud server is able to evaluate path planning of the vehicle after receiving the data collected by the vehicle. If the path planned by the vehicle passes through inaccessible regions (e.g., construction or job sites, accident scenes), the cloud server may generate a new path for the vehicle based on the 3D map and transmit data related to the new path to the vehicle. ”); and
based on the 3D representation, controlling the autonomous device to move along the new path (Li, at least one para. 0408; “Therefore, if the vehicle herein is an autonomous vehicle, it may autonomously perform obstacle avoidance with aid of information derived from the 3D map existing at the remote server.”).
the combination of Reith, HATAYAMA, and Li are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the overall method of Reith and HATAYAMA with the teaching of Li. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the vehicle is able to autonomously adjust the controlling aspect of the vehicle to reach the destination or avoid obstacles (Li; 408).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Reith and HATAYAMA teaches The system as recited in claim 9, the memory further storing instructions that, when executed by the processor (Reith, at least one para. 0018-0029) and (HATAYAMA, at least one para. 0076, 0128) further cause the system to:
The combination of Reith and HATAYAMA does not explicitly teach determine a plurality of new locations within the physical environment so as to define a new path that connects the plurality of new locations; and
based on the 3D representation, control the autonomous device to move along the new path.
However, Li, in the same field of endeavor (Li, at least one para. 0002; “Vehicles can be outfitted with various types of sensors to sense and navigate through an environment without (or with minimal) human intervention. These vehicles can detect a surrounding environment and enable autonomous navigation while moving around.”) teaches determine a plurality of new locations within the physical environment so as to define a new path that connects the plurality of new locations (Li, at least one para. 0387; “In some embodiments, the cloud server may also help the vehicle navigate along a planned route. For example, the cloud server is able to evaluate path planning of the vehicle after receiving the data collected by the vehicle. If the path planned by the vehicle passes through inaccessible regions (e.g., construction or job sites, accident scenes), the cloud server may generate a new path for the vehicle based on the 3D map and transmit data related to the new path to the vehicle. ”); and
based on the 3D representation, control the autonomous device to move along the new path (Li, at least one para. 0408; “Therefore, if the vehicle herein is an autonomous vehicle, it may autonomously perform obstacle avoidance with aid of information derived from the 3D map existing at the remote server.”).
the combination of Reith, HATAYAMA, and Li are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field as navigation of autonomous vehicle as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the overall method of Reith and HATAYAMA with the teaching of Li. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the vehicle is able to autonomously adjust the controlling aspect of the vehicle to reach the destination or avoid obstacles (Li; 408).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UPUL P CHANDRASIRI whose telephone number is (703)756-5823. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8.30 am to 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, Christian Chace can be reached at 571-272-4190. 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.
/U.P.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665