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 .
Status of Claims
Pending
1-17, 19-21
Cancelled
18
35 U.S.C. 103
1-17, 19-21
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/22/2026 has been entered.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-17, 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cole et al. (US 2019/0262993 A1, “Cole”) and further in view of Usui et al. (US 2021/0323157 A1, “Usui”).
Regarding claim 1: Cole teaches: A method of handling safety of an industrial robot, the method comprising ([0003]):
providing at least one virtual safety border defined in relation to the industrial robot, where each virtual safety border is associated with a condition to be fulfilled by the industrial robot ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]);
obtaining environment data of a physical environment of the industrial robot by means of an environment sensor ([0020]; [0028]; [0012]);
determining, by a control system, an obstacle position of an obstacle in the environment based on the environment data ([0019]; [0020]);
evaluating, by the control system, a border position of each virtual safety border with regard to the obstacle position ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0029]).
However, Cole does not explicitly teach: approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and operating the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position.
Usui teaches: approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and operating the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position ([0130] size or resize buffer zone around robot. robot model can include buffer zone to be larger for less complexity of operation environment represented by environment model. On other hand, robot model can include buffer zone to be smaller or reduce threshold distance for more complex type of operation environment. [0131] If instance of items in operation environment crosses buffer zone, and that instance of items not already found in environment model for operation environment, then model update module can update environment model with additional information. [0149] As operation environment is changed, can detect traversal to buffer zone and if item is not expected, environment model can be updated based on traversal of buffer zone. [0157] generating robot model representing robot including buffer zone surrounding robot, environment, and executing collision check thread. [0158] determine whether jog command results in collision includes traversing buffer zone without representation of item included in environment model, updating environment model with item. [0159] resizing buffer zone based on environment model. [0160] generating robot model of robot, robot model including buffer zone surrounding robot; determine whether jog command results in collision includes determining item in environment model enters first buffer. [0161] generating environment model as complex for operation environment; reducing size of buffer zone based on environment. [0162] terminating jog command by robot based on unobstructed status not being provided before collision check time limit).
Cole and Usui are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of safety controls in robotics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cole with the aspects of Usui to create, with a reasonable expectation for success, a method/system for handling safety of a robot including approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and operating the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position. The motivation for modification would have been to have a resulting method, process, apparatus, device, product, and/or system that is cost-effective, highly versatile, accurate, sensitive, and effective, and can be implemented by adapting known components for ready, efficient, and economical manufacturing, application, and utilization (Usui, [0163]).
Regarding claim 2: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation of the border position comprises determining whether any obstacle is positioned between the industrial robot and the virtual safety border (Cole: [0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0023]; [0052]).
Regarding claim 3: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation of the border position comprises determining a safety distance between the virtual safety border and the obstacle when the virtual safety border is positioned between the industrial robot and the obstacle (Cole: [0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0023]; [0052]).
Regarding claim 4: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 3, wherein the at least one condition comprises a protective stop of the industrial robot, and wherein the evaluation of the border position further includes evaluating the safety distance in view of a braking distance of the industrial robot for the protective stop (Cole: [0042]; [0052]).
Regarding claim 5: Cole teaches: A method of handling safety of an industrial robot, the method comprising ([0003]):
obtaining environment data of a physical environment of the industrial robot by means of an environment sensor ([0020]; [0028]; [0012]);
determining, by a control system, an obstacle position of an obstacle in the environment based on the environment data ([0019]; [0020]);
defining, by the control system, at least one virtual safety border in relation to the industrial robot based on the obstacle position, the at least one virtual safety border being associated with a condition to be fulfilled by the industrial robot ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4, safe zones; [0020]; [0022]).
However, Cole does not explicitly teach: operating the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border.
Usui teaches: operating the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border ([0130]- [0131]. [0149]. [0157]-[0162]).
Cole and Usui are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of safety controls in robotics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cole with the aspects of Usui to create, with a reasonable expectation for success, a method/system for handling safety of a robot including operating the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border. The motivation for modification would have been to have a resulting method, process, apparatus, device, product, and/or system that is cost-effective, highly versatile, accurate, sensitive, and effective, and can be implemented by adapting known components for ready, efficient, and economical manufacturing, application, and utilization (Usui, [0163]).
Regarding claim 6: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 1, wherein the environment sensor is carried by the industrial robot (Cole: [0020]; [0012]; see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 6, further comprising moving the industrial robot in the environment to obtain the environment data by means of the environment sensor (Cole: [0021]; [0023]-[0027]; [0056]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 8: Cole teaches: A control system for handling safety of an industrial robot, the control system comprising at least one data processing device and at least one memory having at least one computer program stored thereon, the at least one computer program having program code which, when executed by the at least one data processing device, causes the at least one data processing device to perform the steps of ([0001]; [0013]; [0016]; [0017]):
providing at least one virtual safety border defined in relation to the industrial robot, where each virtual safety border is associated with a condition to be fulfilled by the industrial robot ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]);
obtaining environment data of a physical environment of the industrial robot from an environment sensor ([0020]; [0028]; [0012]);
determining an obstacle position of an obstacle in the environment based on the environment data ([0019]; [0020]);
evaluating a border position of each virtual safety border with regard to the obstacle position ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0029]).
However, Cole does not explicitly teach: approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position.
Usui teaches: approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position ([0130]- [0131]. [0149]. [0157]-[0162]).
Cole and Usui are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of safety controls in robotics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cole with the aspects of Usui to create, with a reasonable expectation for success, a method/system for handling safety of a robot including approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position. The motivation for modification would have been to have a resulting method, process, apparatus, device, product, and/or system that is cost-effective, highly versatile, accurate, sensitive, and effective, and can be implemented by adapting known components for ready, efficient, and economical manufacturing, application, and utilization (Usui, [0163]).
Regarding claim 9: Cole-Usui further teach: The control system according to claim 8, wherein the evaluation of the border position comprises determining whether any obstacle is positioned between the industrial robot and the virtual safety border (Cole: [0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0023]; [0052]).
Regarding claim 10: Cole-Usui further teach: The control system according to claim 8, wherein the evaluation of the border position comprises determining a safety distance between the virtual safety border and the obstacle when the virtual safety border is positioned between the industrial robot and the obstacle (Cole: [0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0023]; [0052]).
Regarding claim 11: Cole-Usui further teach: The control system according to claim 10, wherein the at least one condition comprises a protective stop of the industrial robot, and wherein the evaluation of the border position further includes evaluating the safety distance in view of a braking distance of the industrial robot for the protective stop (Cole: [0042]; [0052]).
Regarding claim 12: Cole teaches: A control system for handling safety of an industrial robot, the control system comprising at least one data processing device and at least one memory having at least one computer program stored thereon, the at least one computer program having program code which, when executed by the at least one data processing device, causes the at least one data processing device to perform the steps of ([0001]; [0013]; [0016]; [0017]):
obtaining environment data of a physical environment of the industrial robot from an environment sensor ([0020]; [0028]; [0012]);
determining an obstacle position of an obstacle in the environment based on the environment data ([0019]; [0020]);
defining at least one virtual safety border in relation to the industrial robot based on the obstacle position, the at least one virtual safety border being associated with a condition to be fulfilled by the industrial robot ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]).
However, Cole does not explicitly teach: commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border.
Usui teaches: commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border ([0130]- [0131]. [0149]. [0157]-[0162]).
Cole and Usui are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of safety controls in robotics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cole with the aspects of Usui to create, with a reasonable expectation for success, a method/system for handling safety of a robot including commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border. The motivation for modification would have been to have a resulting method, process, apparatus, device, product, and/or system that is cost-effective, highly versatile, accurate, sensitive, and effective, and can be implemented by adapting known components for ready, efficient, and economical manufacturing, application, and utilization (Usui, [0163]).
Regarding claim 13: Cole-Usui further teach: The control system according to claim 8, wherein the environment sensor is carried by the industrial robot (Cole: [0020]; [0012]; Fig. 1), and
wherein the at least one computer program comprises program code which, when executed by the at least one data processing device, causes the at least one data processing device to perform the step of commanding movement of the industrial robot in the environment to obtain the environment data by means of the environment sensor (Cole: [0016]; [0021]; [0023]-[0027]; [0056]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 14: Cole teaches: A robot system comprising an industrial robot, an environment sensor and a control system for handling safety of the industrial robot ([0001]; [0020]; [0012]; [0013]),
the control system having at least one data processing device and at least one memory having at least one computer program stored thereon, the at least one computer program having program code which, when executed by the at least one data processing device, causes the at least one data processing device to perform the steps of ([0013]; [0016]; [0017]):
providing at least one virtual safety border defined in relation to the industrial robot, where each virtual safety border is associated with a condition to be fulfilled by the industrial robot ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]);
obtaining environment data of a physical environment of the industrial robot from an environment sensor ([0020]; [0028]; [0012]),
determining an obstacle position of an obstacle in the environment based on the environment data ([0019]; [0020]);
evaluating a border position of each virtual safety border with regard to the obstacle position ([0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0029]);
However, Cole does not explicitly teach: approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position.
Usui teaches: approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position ([0130]- [0131]. [0149]. [0157]-[0162]).
Cole and Usui are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of safety controls in robotics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cole with the aspects of Usui to create, with a reasonable expectation for success, a method/system for handling safety of a robot including approving or disapproving the border position of each virtual safety border based on the evaluation; and commanding operation of the industrial robot using the at least one virtual safety border upon approval of the border position. The motivation for modification would have been to have a resulting method, process, apparatus, device, product, and/or system that is cost-effective, highly versatile, accurate, sensitive, and effective, and can be implemented by adapting known components for ready, efficient, and economical manufacturing, application, and utilization (Usui, [0163]).
Regarding claim 15: Cole-Usui further teach: The robot system according to claim 14, wherein the environment sensor is carried by the industrial robot (Cole: [0020]; [0012]; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 2, wherein the evaluation of the border position comprises determining a safety distance between the virtual safety border and the obstacle when the virtual safety border is positioned between the industrial robot and the obstacle (Cole: [0019] FIGS. 3 and 4; [0020]; [0022]; [0023]; [0052]).
Regarding claim 17: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 2, wherein the environment sensor is carried by the industrial robot (Cole: [0020]; [0012]; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 19: Cole-Usui further teach: The control system according to claim 9, wherein the environment sensor is carried by the industrial robot (Cole: [0020]; [0012]; Fig. 1), and
wherein the at least one computer program comprises program code which, when executed by the at least one data processing device, causes the at least one data processing device to perform the step of commanding movement of the industrial robot in the environment to obtain the environment data by means of the environment sensor (Cole: [0016]; [0021]; [0023]-[0027]; [0056]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 20: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 1, further comprising automatically verifying, by the control system and based on the evaluation, the border position of each virtual safety border (Cole: [0006] FIG. 3. [0049]. [0044]).
Regarding claim 21: Cole-Usui further teach: The method according to claim 20, wherein the obstacle is stationary in the environment (Cole: [0053]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17, 19-21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON B EMMETT whose telephone number is (303)297-4231. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 - 5:00 ET.
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, Tommy Worden can be reached at (571)272-4876. 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.
/MADISON B EMMETT/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights