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 .
1. This application has been examined. Claims 1-20 are pending.
2. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference label “108” has been used to designate both the actuator(s) in Fig. 1 and the alignment strip in Fig. 4. The examiner notes that reference label “108” in Fig. 4 appears to be incorrect and should actually be “118” based on the specification at paragraph [0040] as well as Figs. 2 and 3.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
3. 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.
4. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4.1 Claims 1-4, 7, 8, 11-14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Purchase et al. (US 6,163,745).
A. As per claim 1, Purchase discloses:
A system comprising:
an alignment strip coupled to a surface (Fig. 2:30) (col. 8, ln. 42-45: where the surface will not be so cluttered or subject to coverage with debris, it is conceivable that the element could be provided on the ground); and
a vehicle (Fig. 2) configured to move over the surface, wherein the vehicle comprises:
an ultraviolet (UV) light emitter configured to emit UV light onto the alignment strip (col. 6, ln. 43-45: an ultraviolet lamp 50 is provided and mounted generally centrally on the vehicle 20), wherein the UV light emitted by the UV light emitter illuminates the alignment strip (col. 6, ln. 48-49: The lamp 50 illuminates a substantial length of the element 30); and
an imaging device configured to acquire one or more images of the alignment strip as illuminated by the UV light (col. 6, ln. 55-56: Forward and rearward television cameras 52 and 54 are provided; ln. 64-67: the image received by the television camera 52 or 54 is essentially a wholly dark background showing a bright strip where the elongate element 30 is present).
B. As per claim 11, as noted above whereby the system performs the functions of emitting, illuminating and acquiring (i.e., functions of the UV emitter and camera(s) relative to the alignment strip).
C. As per claims 2 and 12, as above whereby a control unit is connected to the UV emitter and camera(s) to process the obtained images and control the vehicle to follow a path relative to the illuminated alignment strip (col. 3, ln. 52-59: a main control unit for determining the location of the vehicle relative to the desired path from the positional information from the detection means, and for controlling the steering actuation means to cause the vehicle to follow the desired path, the main control unit being adapted for connection to the detection means and the steering actuation means; col. 4, ln. 25-30: the detection means comprises a video camera means, which provides control information to the main control unit in the form of data representing an image indicating the relative location of the elongate element to the vehicle, and two cameras can be provided for forward and rearward movement; col. 7, ln. 44-45: A main control unit 62 controls an ultraviolet lamp actuator 64 and a television camera).
D. As per claims 3, 4, 13 and 14, as above whereby the surface may be a floor in a factory (col. 8, ln. 44-46: In factories and the like, it could be provided as a painted strip on a floor) or a road (col. 8, ln. 41-45: In less harsh environments, particularly where the surface will not be so cluttered or subject to coverage with debris, it is conceivable that the element could be provided on the ground).
E. As per claims 7, 8 and 17, as above whereby the strip may be a plastic tube (col. 3, ln. 63-65: elongate element can comprise a tube formed from plastics material with the fluorescent material embedded in the plastics material) embedded in the surface (i.e., retained in a channel) (col. 8, ln. 44-45: the element could be provided on the ground, preferably embedded).
4.2 Claims 1-4 and 11-14, are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (KR 20220052570). Reference is made to the translation provided.
A. As per claim 1, Kim discloses:
A system (Fig. 3) comprising:
an alignment strip coupled to a surface (transparent UV line); and
a vehicle (unmanned transportation vehicle) configured to move over the surface (UV line that tracks the transparent UV line by capturing the transparent UV line with the ultraviolet camera of the unmanned guided vehicle (C) and running along the transparent UV line of the movement path), wherein the vehicle comprises:
an ultraviolet (UV) light emitter configured to emit UV light onto the alignment strip, wherein the UV light emitted by the UV light emitter illuminates the alignment strip (the ultraviolet camera of the unmanned guided vehicle (C) may be composed of … an ultraviolet lamp; the transparent UV line is applied with a transparent optical paint, and when ultraviolet rays are incident, light is emitted to the outside); and
an imaging device configured to acquire one or more images of the alignment strip as illuminated by the UV light (an ultraviolet ray camera for tracking the transparent UV line; captures the UV line with an ultraviolet camera).
B. As per claim 11, as noted above whereby the system performs the functions of emitting, illuminating and acquiring (i.e., functions of the UV emitter and camera(s) relative to the alignment strip).
C. As per claims 2 and 12, as above whereby the unmanned guided vehicle processes camera images of UV line to adjust left and right driving motors to control the direction of travel relative to the UV line (the rotational speed of the left and right driving motors of the unmanned guided vehicle (C) is adjusted to adjust the driving direction so that the transparent UV line in the image screen captured by the ultraviolet camera is placed on a defined virtual driving line. A driving direction correction step (S31) that follows is further provided).
D. As per claim 3, 4, 13 and 14, as above whereby the surface may be a floor in a factory environment (the floor of the space where the cargo is transported by an unmanned guided vehicle that loads and transports cargo) or a road (on a road covered with a transparent UV line).
5. 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 non-obviousness.
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.
5.1 Claims 5, 6, 9, 10, 15, 16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purchase et al. (US 6,163,757) in view of Reid (US 2017/ 0134633).
A. As per claims 5 and 15, as noted above whereby Purchase provides a camera to obtain images of the alignment strip (col. 6, ln. 55-56: Forward and rearward television cameras 52 and 54 are provided; ln. 64-67: the image received by the television camera 52 or 54 is essentially a wholly dark background showing a bright strip where the elongate element 30 is present). Purchase does not explicitly disclose that the camera(s) takes black and white images; however, one of ordinary skill in the AGV art would have found it obvious to utilize conventional black and white camera(s), with a reasonable expectation of success, because the illumination of the alignment strip would have produced distinct contrast with the background surface for obtaining the position of the UV line whether it was in color or black and white (note Purchase describes high contrast as desirable) (col. 6, ln. 65-67: a wholly dark background showing a bright strip where the elongate element 30 is present). The type of camera would have been a design choice based on cost, necessity of color vs. black/white, and/or environment of use.
B. As per claims 6 and 16, as above whereby Purchase discloses using a UV light emitter (col. 6, ln. 43-45: an ultraviolet lamp 50 is provided and mounted generally centrally on the vehicle 20) which necessarily emits light wavelengths within the UV range. The claimed invention differs in that the emitter emits a wavelength of 365 nanometers. Reid is in the same field of endeavor of detecting objects using UV light emitters and cameras, including applications in autonomous vehicle control [0097- in the field of autonomous vehicles, digital cameras on the vehicles can view visible light information and/or NNV light information on roadways or signs or any other location outside of the vehicle. Special pavement markers, for example, can provide instructions to certain autonomous vehicles and/or smart sensors in the digital camera can turn the vehicle based on information captured from outside of the vehicle]. Reid specifies various wavelengths of UV light appropriate for such uses, including 365 nanometers [0037- the term “NNV spectrum” can mean the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum having wavelengths between approximately 389 nm and approximately 365 nm (emphasis added); 0097- digital cameras on the vehicles can view … NNV light information on roadways or signs or any other location outside of the vehicle]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Purchase with the teachings of Reid regarding use of the 365 nanometer wavelength, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it was known in the autonomous vehicle arts to utilize emitters of light in the near visible range, including 365 nanometers, for the purpose of detecting elements of the environment, such as roadways, signs, pavement markings, etc., for autonomous control of a vehicle (Reid at [0097]).
C. As per claims 9, 10, 18 and 19, as above whereby Purchase discloses that the alignment strip (elongate element 30) is a tube formed from plastics material with fluorescent material embedded in the plastic material (col. 3, ln. 63-65), the element 30 fluoresces and radiates visible light, for example of an orange colour (col. 6, ln. 54-55) and essentially a wholly dark background showing a bright strip where the elongate element 30 is present (col. 6, ln. 65-67). The claimed invention differs in that the strip is colored fluorescent neon green against a dark backdrop. However, Purchase teaches that the color of the plastic tube may be fluorescent, such as orange, in a wholly dark background showing the plastic tube as a bright strip. From theses teachings, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a variety of combinations of fluorescent colors and background could provide the required contrast between the alignment strip and the background, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the alignment strip appears as a bright strip in the image obtained by the camera (Purchase: (col. 6, ln. 65-67)).
D. As per claim 20, see comments above in paragraphs (4.1:A,C,E) and (5.1:C) insofar as claim 20 is a combination of claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9 and is rejected for the same reasons previously discussed.
E. 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5.2 Claims 5 and 15 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20220052570).
A. As per claims 5 and 15, as noted above whereby Kim provides a camera to obtain images of the UV line (an ultraviolet ray camera for tracking the transparent UV line; captures the UV line with an ultraviolet camera). Kim does not explicitly disclose that the camera takes black and white images; however, one of ordinary skill in the AGV art would have found it obvious to utilize conventional black and white camera(s), with a reasonable expectation of success, because the illumination of the UV line would have produced distinct contrast with the background surface for obtaining the position of the UV line whether it was in color or black and white. The type of camera would have been a design choice based on cost, necessity of color vs. black/white, and/or environment of use.
B. 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In particular,
• Yu et al. (CN 113500995)- vehicle capable of automatic driving emits UV light upon a lane line and detects reflectance by a camera to adjust vehicle driving; line comprises fluorescent material to improve brightness whereas the road absorbs UV.
• Lee (US 2018/0088587)- AV which tracks line on floor of factory using camera; line on floor may be adhesive tape or painted strip.
• Rivers (WO 2018/051081)- “Background of the Invention” discusses line following AGVs and various issues associated therewith including installation and ability to readily change path and/or degradation of applied tapes or paint; disclosed invention directed to virtual line following AGV which eliminates need for physical line.
• Ishikawa et al. (Visual Navigation of an Autonomous Vehicle Using White Line Recognition)- AGV with white line following control; guide line is applied to floor and detected by a camera; images analyzed to generate corrections in AGV movement.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J. ZANELLI whose telephone number is (571)272-6969. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 9-4; Th 9-2.
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, Ramya P. Burgess can be reached at 571-272-6011. 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.
/MICHAEL J ZANELLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661