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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were/was submitted on 07/08/2024, and 08/21/2024. The information disclosure statement(s) have/has been considered by the examiner.
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are pending.
No claims are amended.
No claims are withdrawn from consideration.
No claims are cancelled.
No claims are added.
Claims 1 and 14 are independent claims.
Claims 1-20 will be examined.
This Non-Final Office action is in response to the “Claims” dated 07/08/2024.
Claim Interpretation
During examination, claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP §2111, MPEP §2111.01 and In re Yamamoto et al., 222 USPQ 934 10 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. See MPEP 2111.01 (I). It is further noted it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification, i.e., a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment. See 15 MPEP 2111.01 (II).
A first exception to the prohibition of reading limitations from the specification into the claims is when the Applicant for patent has provided a lexicographic definition for the term. See MPEP §2111.01 (IV). Following a review of the claims in view of the specification herein, the Office has found that Applicant has not provided any lexicographic definitions, either expressly or implicitly, for any claim terms or phrases with any reasonable clarity, deliberateness and precision. Accordingly, the Office concludes that Applicant has not acted as his/her own lexicographer.
A second exception to the prohibition of reading limitations from the specification into the claims is when the claimed feature is written as a means-plus-function. See 35 U.S.C. §112(f) and MPEP §2181-2183. As noted in MPEP §2181, a three-prong test is used to determine the scope of a means-plus-function limitation in a claim:
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
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"
the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
The Office reviewed the claims for terms containing limitations of means or means type language that must be analyzed under 35 U.S.C. §112 (f), and no terms are being interpreted as such.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 13 have typographical errors that need to be corrected. It appears the limitation “behaviors form the database” should be revised as “behaviors from the database”.
Office suggests review of all claims to determine if there are similar errors as listed above. The list above is exemplary in nature and by no means exhaustive. Appropriate action is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9, 13-14, and 17-19, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KEAN, US 20180171590, herein further known as Kean, in view of LEWIS et al., US 20190265051, herein further known as Lewis.
Regarding claim 1, Kean discloses a system for an autonomous truck (¶¶ [0007], [0010], see also FIG. , automated work vehicle, [0014-0017], automated work vehicle [0019], automated work vehicle, [0024], automated work vehicle), the system comprising: one or more sensors (¶¶ [0047-0066]); a database storing a plurality of behaviors (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…), the stored behaviors comprising elementary behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) for various phases for loading of the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0060-0062], automated operation of the work vehicle 100 to perform one or more tasks includes loading and unloading material), the stored behaviors comprising (i) a plurality of predetermined maneuvers (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) (¶ [0087]) for the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0026-0027], moving across the environment, moving toward a goal or away form an obstacle, [0032-0033], task of moving material… [0035-0036], movement, [0038-0040], move/movement, [0043-0044], move/movement, [0057], control commands to various actuators, [0068-0069], move/movement, [0071], see also FIG. 4, ), (ii) a plurality of sensing behaviors (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0057], [0059], [0065], sensors and sensor signals), and (iii) a plurality of logic behaviors (¶¶ [0021-0022], logic elements carry out functions); and a controller operatively coupled to the database (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…) and the one or more sensors (¶¶ [0045], [0047], [0054], [0057]), and being configured to control the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0024-0027], [0089]), wherein the controller is operable to execute stored instructions to: receive, via a user interface (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received), a selection by an operator (¶¶ [0057-0058]) of a first one of the elementary behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) from the database (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…) (¶¶ [0021-0022], logic elements carry out functions), the first selected elementary behavior (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) comprising a sensing behavior that determines a status (¶¶ [0030-0032], [0062], [0067], [0071-0076], state represents the current status, see also FIG. 4, [0080-0094]) of loading of the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0060-0062], automated operation of the work vehicle 100 to perform one or more tasks includes loading and unloading material) based on signals from the one or more sensors (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0062], information regarding the environment, [0065]); receive, via the user interface (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received), a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0057-0058]) of a second one of the elementary behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) from the database (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…), the second selected elementary behavior (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) comprising a logic behavior(¶¶ [0021-0022], logic elements carry out functions) that maintains a state of the autonomous truck until it is determined that the loading (¶¶ [0060-0062], automated operation of the work vehicle 100 to perform one or more tasks includes loading and unloading material) of the autonomous truck is complete (¶¶ [0030], completion of an overall task [0096], designated tasks are complete) assemble together the first and second selected elementary behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) to form an operation script for the loading of the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0060-0062], automated operation of the work vehicle 100 to perform one or more tasks includes loading and unloading material) (¶¶ [0031-0032], [0038], [0052], [0060-0062], [0069], [0072-0074], [0081-0082]; and control the autonomous truck to perform the operation script for loading (¶¶ [0057], control signal/communications, [0067], [0080], [0085-0086], vehicle commands).
Furthermore, Lewis teaches selection by an operator ([0056], [0101] operator of the vehicle to select) of a first one of the elementary behaviors from the database, the first selected elementary behavior comprising a sensing behavior that determines a status of loading of the autonomous truck (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8) based on signals from the one or more sensors (¶¶ [0035-0036], see also FIG. 2, [0038], on-board sensors, [0042], aiding navigation of a vehicle to a particular target destination, includes a number of sensors, databases, and processing elements, [0046-0047], see also FIG. 3, [0050], in the case of vehicles, the database can store information describing the type of vehicle, its size and capacity, its current status (e.g., loaded or unloaded, in use or not in use, etc.), weight, and velocity, [0056-0058], allows an operator of the vehicle to select…, [0060], allows a user to alter the scale and orientation of the visual representation of the roadmap system and plot acceptable routes between the current location of the remote vehicle and predefined points of interest, wherein sensors collected at least the vehicle current location/position/orientation); receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator ([0056], [0101] operator of the vehicle to select) of a second one of the elementary behaviors from the database, the second selected elementary behavior comprising a logic behavior that maintains a state of the autonomous truck until it is determined that the loading of the autonomous truck is complete (¶¶ [0026-0027]) (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8); assemble together the first and second selected elementary behaviors to form an operation script (¶¶ [0026-0031], executable code, computer instructions) for the loading of the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0012], control directly an autonomous vehicle, [0069-0071], loading operations) (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8); and control the autonomous truck to perform the operation script for loading (¶¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8, [0131]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the selection by an operator of a first one of the elementary behaviors from the database, the first selected elementary behavior comprising a sensing behavior that determines a status of loading of the autonomous truck based on signals from the one or more sensors; receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator of a second one of the elementary behaviors from the database, the second selected elementary behavior comprising a logic behavior that maintains a state of the autonomous truck until it is determined that the loading of the autonomous truck is complete ; assemble together the first and second selected elementary behaviors to form an operation script for the loading of the autonomous truck; and control the autonomous truck to perform the operation script for loading as taught by Lewis.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Lewis for the reasons stated in Lewis paragraph [0003], more robust system and method for maintaining safe operation of vehicles. Furthermore, paragraph [0035] discloses the vehicle travel path is selected to optimize efficiency for navigating the vehicle to the target destination, but can also be optimized for safety.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kean discloses further the plurality of behaviors stored by the database (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…) comprise predetermined behaviors (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) for unloading or dumping by the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0060-0062], automated operation of the work vehicle 100 to perform one or more tasks includes loading and unloading material) (¶¶ [0005], [0032], [0038], [0060-0062], [0072-0074], [0085-0089]).
Furthermore, Lewis teaches the plurality of behaviors stored by the database comprise predetermined behaviors for unloading or dumping by the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0053], Configuration database 310, maneuvers may include dumping material, for which configuration database 310 would include a condition that the vehicle be carrying sufficient material to warrant dumping, [0087], vehicle dumping at least a portion of that load, [0100], vehicle needs to dump some material) (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the plurality of behaviors stored by the database comprise predetermined behaviors for unloading or dumping by the autonomous truck as taught by Lewis.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Lewis for the reasons stated in Lewis paragraph [0003], more robust system and method for maintaining safe operation of vehicles. Furthermore, paragraph [0035] discloses the vehicle travel path is selected to optimize efficiency for navigating the vehicle to the target destination, but can also be optimized for safety.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 2 above.
Kean discloses receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0046], [0057-0058]) of at least one of the predetermined behaviors (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) for unloading or dumping (¶¶ [0005], [0032], [0038], [0060-0062], [0072-0074], [0085-0089]) stored by the database (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…); and control the autonomous truck to perform the selected at least one of the predetermined behaviors (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) at an unloading or dumping location, wherein material is unloaded or dumped by the autonomous truck at the unloading or dumping location by performing the selected at least one of the predetermined behaviors (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) (see rejections of claim 1 and claim 2, see also ¶¶ [0062], element of interest, such as an unloading position, [0072], an unloading position 530 in a safe and efficient manner, see also FIGS. 5 and 6),
Furthermore, Lewis teaches receive, via the user interface (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received), a selection by the operator ([0056], [0101] operator of the vehicle to select) of at least one of the predetermined behaviors for unloading or dumping stored by the database; and control the autonomous truck to perform the selected at least one of the predetermined behaviors at an unloading or dumping location, wherein material is unloaded or dumped by the autonomous truck at the unloading or dumping location by performing the selected at least one of the predetermined behaviors (from claim 1 rejection, (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8) (¶¶ [0035-0036], see also FIG. 2, [0038], on-board sensors, [0042], aiding navigation of a vehicle to a particular target destination, includes a number of sensors, databases, and processing elements, [0046-0047], see also FIG. 3, [0050], in the case of vehicles, the database can store information describing the type of vehicle, its size and capacity, its current status (e.g., loaded or unloaded, in use or not in use, etc.), weight, and velocity, [0056-0058], allows an operator of the vehicle to select…, [0060], allows a user to alter the scale and orientation of the visual representation of the roadmap system and plot acceptable routes between the current location of the remote vehicle and predefined points of interest, wherein sensors collected at least the vehicle current location/position/orientation), (¶¶ [0026-0027], [0030], [0035]) (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8), (¶¶ [0026-0031], executable code, computer instructions), (¶¶ [0012], control directly an autonomous vehicle, [0069-0071], loading operations) (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8), (¶¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8, [0131]), and from claim 2 rejection, (¶¶ [0053], Configuration database 310, maneuvers may include dumping material, for which configuration database 310 would include a condition that the vehicle be carrying sufficient material to warrant dumping, [0087], vehicle dumping at least a portion of that load, [0100], vehicle needs to dump some material) (¶ [0104], see also FIGS. 6-8)).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator of at least one of the predetermined behaviors for unloading or dumping stored by the database; and control the autonomous truck to perform the selected at least one of the predetermined behaviors at an unloading or dumping location, wherein material is unloaded or dumped by the autonomous truck at the unloading or dumping location by performing the selected at least one of the predetermined behaviors as taught by Lewis.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Lewis for the reasons stated in Lewis paragraph [0003], more robust system and method for maintaining safe operation of vehicles. Furthermore, paragraph [0035] discloses the vehicle travel path is selected to optimize efficiency for navigating the vehicle to the target destination, but can also be optimized for safety.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 3 above.
Kean discloses further one or more sensors are configured to detect features in an environment surrounding the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0053-0054], [0061-0062]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kean discloses further receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received) of a third one of the elementary behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) from the database (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…), the third selected elementary behavior (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) comprising a predetermined maneuver (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) that defines a trajectory for the autonomous truck to follow to a loading location (¶¶ [0005], maneuvering the vehicle to a pile of material, filling the bucket, [0069], bucket 112 is maneuvered into the proper positions,; and control the autonomous truck to perform the third selected elementary behavior (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) and to follow the trajectory to the loading location (¶¶ [0062], loading position location, direction, speed, and/or acceleration of motion, [0072], traveling from an initial position (0,0) to a loading position… to collect material, [0074], “travel to loading position”, [0080], path 512, see also FIG. 5).
Furthermore, Lewis teaches receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator ([0056], [0101] operator of the vehicle to select) of a third one of the elementary behaviors from the database, the third selected elementary behavior comprising a predetermined maneuver that defines a trajectory for the autonomous truck to follow to a loading location; and control the autonomous truck to perform the third selected elementary behavior and to follow the trajectory to the loading location (¶¶ [0008-0010], loading area/position, [0013-0014], calculating a path, calculated path is selected, [0035], path to the target destination, [0043-0044], and [0057-0058], system generates a path, selecting the best path, [0106], predetermined dump spot, system stores target position and associated data in a current target database, associated data may describe a particular path (i.e. predetermined maneuver) upon which the target should be approached, [0117-0131]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator of a third one of the elementary behaviors from the database, the third selected elementary behavior comprising a predetermined maneuver that defines a trajectory for the autonomous truck to follow to a loading location ; and control the autonomous truck to perform the third selected elementary behavior and to follow the trajectory to the loading location as taught by Lewis.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Lewis for the reasons stated in Lewis paragraph [0003], more robust system and method for maintaining safe operation of vehicles. Furthermore, paragraph [0035] discloses the vehicle travel path is selected to optimize efficiency for navigating the vehicle to the target destination, but can also be optimized for safety.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
Kean discloses during the control of the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0007], [0010], see also FIG. , automated work vehicle, [0014-0017], automated work vehicle [0019], automated work vehicle, [0024], automated work vehicle) to perform the third selected elementary behavior (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) from the database (¶¶ [0102], instructions stored in the computer-readable memory…): receive, from the one or more sensors, a signal (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0057], [0065]) signal indicating detection of an obstacle (¶ [0061-0062], identification of elements within the environment including obstacles, [0083]); determine, in response to the received signal (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0057], [0059], [0065], sensors and sensor signals), one or more variations to the trajectory that avoids a collision with the detected obstacle (¶¶ [0024], [0032], [0060-0061], [0070], [0072], navigate within the vehicle environment to avoid obstacles, [0083], accurate action vector component (i.e. variations to the trajectory) may be calculated to avoid obstacle, the one or more variations comprising a trajectory deviation (¶ [0041], steering system to orient the work vehicle 100 in the desired direction, , a velocity change (¶¶ [0042], slowing the rotation of the respective driven wheel 150 based on the receipt of one or more control signals, [0077], action vector), or a stoppage (¶ [0042], stopping the rotation of the respective driven wheel 150 based on the receipt of one or more control signals) of the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0007], [0010], see also FIG. , automated work vehicle, [0014-0017], automated work vehicle [0019], automated work vehicle, [0024], automated work vehicle); and control the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0024-0027], [0089]) to follow the trajectory with the one or more variations (¶ [0041], steering system to orient the work vehicle 100 in the desired direction, (¶¶ [0042], slowing the rotation of the respective driven wheel 150 based on the receipt of one or more control signals, [0077], action vector), (¶ [0042], stopping the rotation of the respective driven wheel 150 based on the receipt of one or more control signals).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
Kean further discloses the one or more sensors comprises a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) system, stereo pair, cameras , radio frequency (RF) beacons, a differential global positioning system (DGPS), acoustic sensor, radio detection and ranging (RADAR), or any combination of the foregoing (¶¶ [0053-0057]).
Furthermore, Lewis teaches the one or more sensors comprises a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) system, stereo pair, cameras , radio frequency (RF) beacons, a differential global positioning system (DGPS), acoustic sensor, radio detection and ranging (RADAR), or any combination of the foregoing (¶¶ [0046-0048]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the one or more sensors comprises a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) system, stereo pair, cameras , radio frequency (RF) beacons, a differential global positioning system (DGPS), acoustic sensor, radio detection and ranging (RADAR), or any combination of the foregoing as taught by Lewis.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Lewis for the reasons stated in Lewis paragraph [0003], more robust system and method for maintaining safe operation of vehicles. Furthermore, paragraph [0035] discloses the vehicle travel path is selected to optimize efficiency for navigating the vehicle to the target destination, but can also be optimized for safety.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
Kean further discloses receive, via the user interface (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received), a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0057-0058]) of a third one of the elementary behaviors from the database (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector), the third selected elementary behavior comprising a sensing behavior (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0057], [0059], [0065], sensors and sensor signals) that detects movement of a loading mechanism(¶¶ [0008], [0024-0027], manipulating a material with an implement, [0059], implement control, generate control signals for operating the work vehicle, [0097], control of implements or linkages of implements) based on signals from the one or more sensors (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0057], [0059], [0065], sensors and sensor signals); receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received) of a fourth one of the elementary behaviors form the database (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector), the fourth selected elementary behavior comprising a maneuver that coordinates movement of the autonomous truck with the detected movement of the loading mechanism (¶¶ [0008], [0024-0027], manipulating a material with an implement, [0059], [0097], machine allocation and fleet management, and machine coordination); and control the autonomous truck to perform the third and fourth selected elementary behaviors (¶¶ [0024-0027], [0089]).
Regarding claim 14, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claims 1 and 3. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 14 can clearly perform the same as the apparatus of claims 1 and 3. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale as claims 1 and 3 above.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 14 above.
Kean further discloses receive, via the user interface, a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received) of a second behavior from the stored (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) plurality of behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector), the selected second behavior comprising a sensing behavior (¶¶ [0062], information regarding the environment) that causes the controller to determine a status (¶¶ [0030-0032], [0062], [0067], [0071-0076], state represents the current status, see also FIG. 4, [0080-0094]) of loading of the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0060-0062], automated operation of the work vehicle 100 to perform one or more tasks include loading and unloading material) based on signals from the one or more sensors (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0062], information regarding the environment, [0065]); receive, via the user interface (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received), a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received) of a third behavior from the stored plurality of behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector), the selected third behavior comprising a logic behavior (¶ [0022], logic elements, look-up tables, or the like, which may carry out a variety of functions) that causes the controller to maintain a state of the autonomous truck (¶ [0080], state of traveling to position is maintained) until the controller determines that the loading of the autonomous truck is complete (¶¶ [0030], completion of an overall task [0096], designated tasks are complete); and control the autonomous truck to perform the selected second and third behaviors (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector), such that material is loaded onto the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0060], automated operation of the work vehicle, tasks include loading and unloading material, [0081]).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 14 above.
Kean further discloses determine an initial trajectory for the autonomous truck from a first location toward a location for dumping or unloading (¶¶ [0080], path 512, see also FIG. 5, [0082], path 514, see also FIG. 6); and control the autonomous truck to follow the trajectory (¶ [0080], automated control system 300 operates in an iterative or continuous manner) toward the location for dumping or unloading (¶¶ [0080], [0089]).
However, Kean does not explicitly state determine a modified trajectory that incorporates randomized deviations from the initial trajectory within a traversable road so as to flatten existing ruts or reduce creation of new ruts in the road; and control the autonomous truck to follow the modified trajectory.
Lewis teaches determine a modified trajectory that incorporates randomized deviations from the initial trajectory within a traversable road so as to flatten existing ruts or reduce creation of new ruts in the road (¶ [0121], paths are generated to minimize the build-up of ruts); and control the autonomous truck to follow the modified trajectory (¶¶ [0012], control directly an autonomous vehicle, [0044]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean determine a modified trajectory that incorporates randomized deviations from the initial trajectory within a traversable road so as to flatten existing ruts or reduce creation of new ruts in the road; and control the autonomous truck to follow the modified trajectory as taught by Lewis.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Lewis for the reasons stated in Lewis paragraph [0003], more robust system and method for maintaining safe operation of vehicles. Furthermore, paragraph [0035] discloses the vehicle travel path is selected to optimize efficiency for navigating the vehicle to the target destination, but can also be optimized for safety.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 14 above.
Kean further discloses receive, via the user interface, (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received), input by the operator (¶¶ [0057-0058]) defining a dumping area (¶ [0072], unloading position 530), order of dumping, grade of dumping, or cliff line.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kean, and Lewis, further in view of OPPOLZER et al., US 20180362025, herein further known as Oppolzer.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
However, Kean does not explicitly state a trajectory recorded during previous manual operation of the truck.
Oppolzer teaches a trajectory recorded during previous manual operation of the truck (¶¶ [0030-0036], see also FIG. 2).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the a trajectory recorded during previous manual operation of the truck as taught by Oppolzer.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Oppolzer for the reasons stated in Oppolzer paragraph [0008], more robust system and method to provide improved way for guiding the motor vehicle with the aid of a subsequent driver assistance system. Furthermore, paragraphs [0010-0011], and [0039] disclose a maximized safety distance during the travel along the second trajectory to avoid risk of an insufficient safety distance in an arbitrary direction of motor vehicle.
Claim(s) 8, and 10, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kean, and Lewis, further in view of DUNCAN et al., US 20150161894, herein further known as Duncan, further in view of THERBER et al., US 20140261939, herein further known as Therber.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kean discloses autonomous truck (¶¶ [0007], [0010], see also FIG. , automated work vehicle, [0014-0017], automated work vehicle [0019], automated work vehicle, [0024], automated work vehicle).
However, Kean does not explicitly state one or more weight measuring sensors, and the controller is further operable to execute stored instructions to: determine a weight loaded based on signals from the one or more weight measuring sensors; compare the determined weight to a maximum load capacity of the autonomous truck; and send, in response to the comparison indicating that the maximum load capacity has been reached, a signal to stop loading.
Duncan teaches one or more weight measuring sensors, and the controller is further operable to execute stored instructions to: determine a weight loaded based on signals from the one or more weight measuring sensors (¶ [0029]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the one or more weight measuring sensors, and the controller is further operable to execute stored instructions to: determine a weight loaded based on signals from the one or more weight measuring sensors as taught by Duncan.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Duncan for the reasons stated in Duncan paragraph [0052], more robust system and methods to indicate the characteristic to an operator, and provide an instruction to the operator on how to improve the characteristic, and/or the like.
Furthermore, Therber teaches compare the determined weight to a maximum load capacity of the autonomous truck; and send, in response to the comparison indicating that the maximum load capacity has been reached, a signal to stop loading (¶ [0055]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the compare the determined weight to a maximum load capacity of the autonomous truck; and send, in response to the comparison indicating that the maximum load capacity has been reached, a signal to stop loading as taught by Therber.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Therber for the reasons stated in Therber paragraph [0055], more robust method and system for additional safety and performance.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kean discloses an autonomous truck (¶¶ [0007], [0010], see also FIG. , automated work vehicle, [0014-0017], automated work vehicle [0019], automated work vehicle, [0024], automated work vehicle), end a signal external to the autonomous truck (¶ [0056], portable electronic device).
However, Kean does not explicitly state a weight measuring sensor for each wheel; and the controller is further operable to execute stored instructions to: determine, based on one or more signals from each weight measuring sensor, a current distribution of weight loaded; and indicating the current distribution of weight loaded.
Duncan teaches a weight measuring sensor for each wheel; and the controller is further operable to execute stored instructions to: determine, based on one or more signals from each weight measuring sensor, a current distribution of weight loaded (¶ [0029]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the weight measuring sensor for each wheel; and the controller is further operable to execute stored instructions to: determine, based on one or more signals from each weight measuring sensor, a current distribution of weight loaded as taught by Duncan.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Duncan for the reasons stated in Duncan paragraph [0052], more robust system and methods to indicate the characteristic to an operator, and provide an instruction to the operator on how to improve the characteristic, and/or the like.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kean, and Lewis, further in view of BREED et al., US 20050273218, herein further known as Breed.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kean discloses the autonomous truck.
However, Kean does not explicitly state at least one of the one or more sensors is disposed in an environment surrounding.
Breed teaches at least one of the one or more sensors is disposed in an environment surrounding (¶ [1247]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the t least one of the one or more sensors is disposed in an environment surrounding as taught by Breed.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Breed for the reasons stated in Breed paragraph [0294-0295], more robust method and systems for improved wireless communication between a monitoring sensor and other systems or devices in the vehicle and obtaining vehicular information.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kean, and Lewis, further in view of YAMASAKI et al., US 20150276416, herein further known as Yamasaki.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kean discloses receive, via the user interface (¶¶ [0046] and [0057], input received, [0058-0060]) a selection by the operator (¶¶ [0057-0058]), a third one of the elementary behaviors from the database, the third selected elementary behavior (¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector) comprising a sensing behavior (¶¶ [0047-0048], [0051], [0054], [0057], [0059], [0065], sensors and sensor signals) that determines a status (¶¶ [0030-0032], [0062], [0067], [0071-0076], state represents the current status, see also FIG. 4, [0080-0094]) of a loading area based on signals from the one or more sensors (¶¶ [0062], kinematic state, [0081-0082], loading operation state, loading position state, [0088], four example states…) ; receive, via the user interface, a selection (¶¶ [0046], [0057], and [0060], input received) of a fourth one of the elementary behaviors form the database, fourth selected elementary behavior ¶¶ [0007], generate command signals for task, [0008], actuator command for propulsion task, [0026], select control logic for task, [0071], select field function to implement the action vector), and control the autonomous truck to perform selected elementary behaviors (¶¶ [0024-0027], [0089]).
However, Kean does not explicitly state a logic behavior that maintains a location of the autonomous truck outside of the loading area until the loading area is clear.
Yamasaki teaches a logic behavior that maintains a location of the autonomous truck outside of the loading area until the loading area is clear (¶¶ [0170], travel permission information to each dump truck that has waited for congestion to clear.
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the a logic behavior that maintains a location of the autonomous truck outside of the loading area until the loading area is clear as taught by Yamasaki.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Yamasaki for the reasons stated in Yamasaki paragraph [0003], more robust methods and system for reduction in the amount of wireless communications to be used in fleet management.
Claim(s) 15, and 20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kean, and Lewis, further in view of STRATTON et al., US 20140371947, herein further known as Stratton.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 14 above.
Kean discloses the selected at least one first behavior is dumping (¶ [0069], loading material, carrying material, and/or dumping material, [0072], work vehicle 100 is configured to dump the material, see also FIGS 5 and 6).
However, Kean does not explicitly state dumping in a user-defined area, dumping according to a user-defined dumping area grade, dumping along one or more user-defined lines, dumping with respect to a user-defined pile center, or coating of a user-defined road or area.
Stratton teaches dumping in a user-defined area, dumping according to a user-defined dumping area grade, dumping along one or more user-defined lines (¶ [0064], establish lanes (i.e. lines), and dump targets), dumping with respect to a user-defined pile center, or coating of a user-defined road or area.
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the dumping along one or more user-defined lines as taught by Stratton.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Stratton for the reasons stated in Stratton paragraph [0002], more robust methods and systems to safely assist in positioning the haul machine for the dumping operations and increase production.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 14 above.
Kean discloses determine, in response to the selection of the at least one first behavior (¶ [0069], loading material, carrying material, and/or dumping material, [0072], work vehicle 100 is configured to dump the material, see also FIGS 5 and 6), dumping of the material by the autonomous truck (¶¶ [0060-0062], automated operation of the work vehicle 100 to perform one or more tasks includes loading and unloading material) (¶¶ [0005], [0032], [0038], [0060-0062], [0072-0074], [0085-0089]).
However, Kean does not explicitly state maintain accessibility for subsequent dumping at a location for dumping or unloading.
Stratton teaches maintain accessibility for subsequent dumping at a location for dumping or unloading (¶¶ [0060-0061]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the dumping along one or more user-defined lines as taught by Stratton.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Stratton for the reasons stated in Stratton paragraph [0002], more robust methods and systems to safely assist in positioning the haul machine for the dumping operations and increase production.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kean, and Lewis, further in view of TERADA et al., US 20160264032, herein further known as Terada.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kean and Lewis disclose all elements of claim 14 above.
However, Kean does not explicitly state control the autonomous truck to perform the selected at least one first behavior until a predetermined value is achieved by the one or more sensors.
Terada teaches control the autonomous truck to perform the selected at least one first behavior until a predetermined value is achieved by the one or more sensors (¶¶ [0080], [0088], [0090-0091]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kean the Terada as taught by Terada.
One would be motivated to modify Kean in view of Terada for the reasons stated in Terada paragraph [0166],more robust methods and systems to improve the efficiency of dumping work.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Terry Buse whose telephone number is (313)446-6647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 PM EST.
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, Scott Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/TERRY C BUSE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3666