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 .
Drawings
The drawings filed September 6, 2024 are accepted.
Abstract
The Abstract filed September 6, 2024 is accepted.
Specification
The specification filed September 6, 2024 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1 – 24 and 27 – 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Du et al. (US 10,737,387 B2).
With respect to claim 1, Du et al. discloses a system (100, Figure 1B) comprising a launch unit (102) which is operable to launch an optical beam (L) into a working volume of the machine; a sensor unit (120) which is moveable by the machine to a plurality of sensor unit positions along the beam (as permitted by robot arm 104), and which is operable, for each of the plurality of sensor unit positions, to measure a transverse beam position at a plurality of measurement positions along the beam, with a position of the sensor unit relative to the beam in at least three degrees of freedom being derivable from the measurements (Figure 1B); and a processor unit (140) which is operable to use the measurements to characterize the machine.
PNG
media_image1.png
385
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Referring to claim 2, Du et al. sets forth a system wherein a position of the sensor unit (120) relative to the beam (L) is derivable in two transverse translational degrees of freedom and at least one transverse rotational degree of freedom (See Figures 2, 3A and 3B, i.e. these steps are commonly performed while calibrating an articulated robot arm).
In regards to claim 3, Du et al. teaches system wherein a position of the sensor unit (120) relative to the beam (L) in the transverse rotational degree of freedom is derivable from a corresponding pair of measurement positions that are spaced apart by a fixed separation (See Figures 2, 3A and 3B, i.e. these steps are commonly performed while calibrating an articulated robot arm).
With regards to claim 4, Du et al. shows a system wherein a position of the sensor unit (120) relative to the beam (L) is derivable in two transverse rotational degrees of freedom (See Figures 2, 3A and 3B, i.e. these steps are commonly performed while calibrating an articulated robot arm).
Referring to claim 5, Du et al. discloses a system wherein the sensor unit (120) is further operable to provide further measurements from which a position of the sensor unit (120) relative to the beam (L) is derivable in a longitudinal rotational degree of freedom (See Figures 2, 3A and 3B, i.e. these steps are commonly performed while calibrating an articulated robot arm).
In regards to claim 6, Du et al. sets forth a system wherein the processor unit (140) is operable to characterize the machine in dependence on a comparison between expected measurements from the sensor unit (120) and the actual measurements from the sensor unit (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, Du et al. teaches a system wherein the geometry of the machine is characterized by a set of model parameters (See Column 5, lines 1 – 8; for example).
With respect to claim 8, Du et al. shows a system wherein the processor unit (140) is operable to update the model parameters based on the comparison (See Column 5, lines 1 – 8; for example).
Referring to claim 9, Du et al. discloses a system wherein characterizing the machine comprises determining a new set of model parameters that characterizes the geometry of the machine better than an existing set of model parameters (Figure 2).
In regards to claim 10, Du et al. sets forth a system comprising a control unit (130) that is operable to control the machine to move the sensor unit along the beam (Figure 1B).
Regarding claim 11, Du et al. teaches a system wherein the control unit (130) is operable to control the machine to move the sensor unit along the beam based on the set of model parameters (Column 5, lines 28 – 41).
With regards to claim 12, Du et al. shows a system wherein the control unit (130) is operable to control movement of the machine to cause the sensor unit (120) to follow a predetermined path along the beam (Column 3, lines 29 – 45).
Referring to claim 13, Du et al. discloses a system wherein the control unit (130) is operable to servo movement of the machine in dependence on the measurements from the sensor unit (120) to maintain substantially constant measurements from the sensor unit for each of the sensor unit positions along the beam.
In regards to claim 14, Du et al. sets forth a system wherein the control unit (130) is operable to move the sensor unit (120) relative to the launch unit (102) such that the beam (L) is incident at each measurement position of the pair in turn, and wherein the processor unit (140) is operable to determine the separation based on the model parameters (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 15, Du et al. teaches a system wherein the processor unit (140) is separate from the control unit (130; Figure 1B).
With respect to claim 16, Du et al. shows a system wherein the sensor unit (120) comprises a sensor at each of the measurement positions (Figures 3A and 3B show the sensor units at various positions; Figures 4A and 4B shows multiple sensor units at various positions), each sensor (Figures 4A and 4B) being adapted to sense the beam in one or two transverse dimensions or directions.
With respect to claim 17, Du et al. shows a system wherein the sensor unit has multiple entry points (121) for the beam (L) at different respective angles while still passing through the same measurement positions (See Figures 3A and 3B).
Referring to claim 18, Du et al. discloses a system wherein a coupling (E2) between the sensor unit (120) and the machine (104) is adapted to place at least one of the measurement positions substantially coincident with a point of interest associated with the machine (i.e. one can define any point as the point of interest of the machine while in use).
In regards to claim 19, Du et al. sets forth a system wherein the point of interest associated with the machine is a tool center point (i.e. one can define any point as the point of interest of the machine while in use and the center point is commonly one of the considered parameters).
Regarding claim 20, Du et al. teaches a system wherein a coupling (E2) between the sensor unit (120) and the machine is adapted to enable rotation of the sensor unit relative to the machine around a predetermined point on the coupling (i.e. typical movement of a robotic arm as shown in figures 3A and 3B).
With regards to claim 21, Du et al. shows a system wherein the predetermined point is substantially coincident with the point of interest (i.e. typical movement of a robotic arm as shown in figures 3A and 3B).
Referring to claim 22, Du et al. discloses a system wherein the launch unit (102) is operable to launch the beam (L) into the working volume of the machine from multiple positions and/or in multiple directions (Figures 3A and 3B).
In regards to claim 23, Du et al. sets forth a system wherein the sensor unit (120) is moved by the machine while the launch unit (102) is fixed, or wherein the launch unit (102) is moved by the machine while the sensor unit (120) is fixed (Figures 3A and 3B).
Regarding claim 24, Du et al. teaches a system wherein the optical beam is a laser beam (L), such as a light beam (See Figure 1B).
With regards to claim 27, Du et al. shows a system wherein characterizing the machine comprises calibrating the machine; and evaluating positioning errors of the machine (See Abstract).
Referring to claim 28, Du et al. discloses a system wherein the machine comprises a coordinate positioning machine (See Figure 1B).
In regards to claim 29, Du et al. sets forth a system wherein the machine comprises a non-Cartesian and/or parallel kinematic machine (See Abstract).
Regarding claim 30, Du et al. teaches a system wherein the machine comprises a robot arm (102, 104; Figure 1B).
Regarding claim 31, Du et al. sets forth a sensor unit (120) for use in a system (100), the sensor unit being moveable by the machine to a plurality of sensor unit positions along the beam (L), and which is operable, for each of the plurality of sensor unit positions, to measure a transverse beam position at a plurality of measurement positions along the beam, with a position of the sensor unit relative to the beam in at least three degrees of freedom being derivable from the measurements (Column 5, lines 42 – 67).
With respect to claim 32, Du et al. shows a directional sensor unit (120) that is mountable to a non-Cartesian machine in a fixed orientation (See Abstract) to perform a method for characterizing the machine (See Figure 2), and which is moveable between a plurality of different fixed orientations relative to the machine to enable the method to be performed with the machine in a plurality of different configurations for the same sensing operations (See Figures 3A and 3B).
Referring to claim 33, the method of characterizing a machine (100), comprising (a) launching (by means of launch unit 102) an optical beam (L) into a working volume of the machine; (b) controlling the machine (by means of controller 130) to move a sensor unit (120) along the beam (L) to a plurality of sensor unit positions along the beam (as represented by Figures 3A and 3B); (c) for each of the plurality of sensor unit positions, using the sensor unit (120) to measure a transverse beam position at a plurality of measurement positions along the beam, with a position of the sensor unit relative to the beam in at least three degrees of freedom being derivable from the measurements; and (d) using the measurements to characterize the machine (See Figure 2) will be achieved by the regular operation of the system disclosed by Du et al.
In regards to claim 34, the method comprising repeating steps (b) and (c) for the same beam (L) launched in step (a) but using a path for the sensor unit path that is offset from the path for the sensor unit from a previous performance of steps (b) and (c), from which combination of measurements a position of the sensor unit relative to the beam is derivable in a rotational degree of freedom around an axis defined by the beam (Figure 2) will be achieved by the regular operation of the system disclosed by Du et al.
Regarding claim 35, the method of characterizing a non-Cartesian coordinate positioning machine (See Abstract), comprising the steps of (a) launching (by means of launch unit 102) an optical beam (L) into a working volume of the machine; (b) controlling (by means of controller 130) the machine to move a sensor unit (120) along the beam (L) to a plurality of sensor unit (120; See plurality of sensor units in figure 4A) positions along the beam; (c) for each of the plurality of sensor unit positions (Figure 4A), using the sensor unit (120) to take measurements from which a position of the sensor unit relative to the beam is derivable in at least three degrees of freedom (as provided by the robotic arms); (d) repeating steps (a) to (c) for a plurality of different launch positions and/or angles for the beam; and (e) using the measurements to characterize the machine will be achieved by the regular operation of the system disclosed by Du et al.
With regards to claim 36, the method wherein the sensor unit (120) for use in the system being moveable by the machine to the plurality of sensor unit positions along the beam (Figures 4A and 4B), and which is operable, for each of the plurality of sensor unit positions (120), to measure the transverse beam position at the plurality of measurement positions along the beam, with the position of the sensor unit relative to the beam in at least three degrees of freedom being derivable from the measurements will be achieved by the regular operation of the system disclosed by Du et al.
Referring to claim 37, Du et al. discloses a computer program which, when run by a computer or a machine controller (130), causes the computer or machine controller (130) to perform the method (Figure 2).
In regards to claim 38, Du et al. sets forth computer-readable medium having stored therein computer program instructions (Column 3, lines 25 – 28) for controlling a computer or a machine controller (130) to perform the method.
Regarding claim 39, Du et al. teaches a machine controller (130) configured to control a machine to perform the method (Column 3, lines 25 – 28).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du et al. (US 10,737,387 B2) in view of Iseli et al. (US 10,030,972 B2).
Du et al. discloses a system and method as recited in paragraph 5 above.
Du et al. does not disclose the linear measurement device as recited in claims 25 and 26.
With regards to claim 25, Iseli et al. shows a calibration system comprising a linear measurement device comprising kinematics (See Column 12, lines 4 - 7); wherein the sensor unit comprises a reflectors (16a-d), and wherein the sensor uses a reference beam (26) and the return beam to provide measurements relating to a longitudinal translational degree of freedom in order to enable measurement optimization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Du et al. by providing a linear measurement device as taught by Iseli et al. in order to enable measurement optimization.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2244. The examiner can normally be reached Mon -Thu, 8:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Laura E Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
September 16, 2026
/YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights